Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background:

The Responding to Urgency of Need in Palliative Care (RUN-PC) Triage Tool is a novel, evidence-based tool by which specialist palliative care services can manage waiting lists and workflow by prioritising access to care for those patients with the most pressing needs in an equitable, efficient and transparent manner.

Aim:

This study aimed to establish the intra- and inter-rater reliability, and convergent validity of the RUN-PC Triage Tool and generate recommended response times.

Design:

An online survey of palliative care intake officers applying the RUN-PC Triage Tool to a series of 49 real clinical vignettes was assessed against a reference standard: a postal survey of expert palliative care clinicians ranking the same vignettes in order of urgency.

Setting/Participants:

Intake officers (n = 28) with a minimum of 2 years palliative care experience and expert clinicians (n = 32) with a minimum of 10 years palliative care experience were recruited from inpatient, hospital consultation and community palliative care services across metropolitan and regional Victoria, Australia.

Results:

The RUN-PC Triage Tool has good intra- and inter-rater reliability in inpatient, hospital consultation and community palliative care settings (Intraclass Correlation Coefficients ranged from 0.61 to 0.74), and moderate to good correlation to expert opinion used as a reference standard (Kendall’s Tau rank correlation coefficients ranged from 0.68 to 0.83).

Conclusion:

The RUN-PC Triage Tool appears to be a reliable and valid tool for the prioritisation of patients referred to specialist inpatient, hospital consultation and community palliative care services.

Keywords

Palliative care hospices triage decision support techniques resource allocation validation studies reproducibility of results

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

MacDonald

. SARP: a value-based approach to hospice admissions triage. Hosp J 1995; 10: 1–13.

Fergus

CJY

Nicol

Russell

. Is a STAS-based tool valid to triage patients at a specialist palliative care inpatient unit? Int J Palliat Nurs 2008; 14: 24–29.

Philip

Whittall

, et al. The development and evaluation of an inpatient palliative care admission triage tool. J Palliat Med 2010; 13: 965–972.

Duraisamy

Muckaden

Dighe

, et al. Triage system in a high-volume domiciliary palliative care unit in urban India. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: e19663–e19663.

Tan

O’Connor

Wearne

, et al. The evaluation of a triage tool for a community palliative care service provider. J Palliat Care 2012; 28: 141–148.

Dhiliwal

Salins

Deodhar

, et al. Pilot testing of triage coding system in home-based palliative care using Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. Indian J Palliat Care 2016; 22: 19.

Bull

Kamal

Harker

, et al. Standardization and scaling of a community-based palliative care model. J Palliat Med 2017; 20: 1237–1243.

Russell

Sundararajan

Hennesy-Anderson

, et al. Responding to urgency of need: initial qualitative stage in the development of a triage tool for use in palliative care services. Palliat Med 2018; 32: 1246–1254.

Philip

Russell

Collins

, et al. The ethics of prioritizing access to palliative care: a qualitative study. Am J Hosp Palliat Med 2019; 36: 577–582.

10.

Russell

Vogrin

Philip

, et al. Novel application of discrete choice experiment methodology to understand how clinicians around the world triage palliative care needs: a research protocol. Palliat Support Care 2019; 17: 66–73.

11.

Russell

Vogrin

Philip

, et al. Triaging the terminally ill – development of the Responding to Urgency of Need in Palliative Care (RUN-PC) triage tool. J Pain Symptom Manag 2020; 59: 95–104.e111.

12.

Mokkink

Terwee

Patrick

, et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63: 737–745.

13.

Rutjes

Reitsma

Coomarasamy

, et al. Evaluation of diagnostic tests when there is no gold standard. A review of methods. Health Technol Assess 2007; 11: iii, ix–51.

14.

Hsu

C-C

Sandford

. The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract Assess Res Eval 2007; 12: 1–8.

15.

Department of Health & Human Services. Victorian Integrated Non-Admitted Health (VINAH) dataset. Melbourne: State Govenment of Victoria.

16.

Zou

. Sample size formulas for estimating intraclass correlation coefficients with precision and assurance. Stat Med 2012; 31: 3972–3981.

17.

Fleiss

Cohen

Everitt

. Large sample standard errors of kappa and weighted kappa. Psychol Bull 1969; 72: 323.

18.

Fleiss

Cohen

. The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educ Psychol Meas 1973; 33: 613–619.

19.

Cicchetti

. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess 1994; 6: 284.

20.

Kendall

Gibbons

. Rank correlation methods. 5th ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1990.

21.

Field

. Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. In: Balakrishnan

Colton

Everitt

, et al. (eds) Wiley StatsRef: statistics reference online. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, 2014.

22.

Newson

. Parameters behind “nonparametric” statistics: Kendall’s tau, Somers’ D and median differences. Stata J 2002; 2: 45–64.

23.

StataCorp. Stata statistical software: release 15. Release 15. College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC, 2017.

24.

Klein

. KAPPAETC: stata module to evaluate interrater agreement, Statistical Software Components S458283, 2016. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College Department of Economics.

25.

Hallgren

. Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: an overview and tutorial. Tutor Quant Methods Psychol 2012; 8: 23.

26.

Masso

Allingham

Banfield

, et al. Palliative care phase: inter-rater reliability and acceptability in a national study. Palliat Med 2015; 29: 22–30.

27.

Masso

Allingham

Johnson

, et al. Palliative care problem severity score: reliability and acceptability in a national study. Palliat Med 2016; 30: 479–485.

28.

Connolly

Burns

Allingham

, et al. Patient outcomes in palliative care in australia: national report for january to june 2019. 2019. Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration, Australian Health Services Research Institute, University of Wollongong.

29.

Myers

Gardiner

Harris

, et al. Evaluating correlation and interrater reliability for four performance scales in the palliative care setting. J Pain Symptom Manag 2010; 39: 250–258.

30.

Beveridge

Ducharme

Janes

, et al. Reliability of the Canadian emergency department triage and acuity scale: interrater agreement. Ann Emerg Med 1999; 34: 155–159.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB

0.16 MB

0.03 MB

Validation of the responding to urgency of need in palliative care (RUN-PC) triage tool

Abstract

Background:

Aim:

Design:

Setting/Participants:

Results:

Conclusion:

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material