Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this quality improvement project is to replicate the Miller et.al (2012) study and evaluate if the TAPS tool can identify patients with an absence of a serious medical illness at a community teaching hospital ED with an on-site inpatient psychiatric unit.

Design: A non-experimental, retrospective overlay of the TAPS tool was done to evaluate its value in the triage process. This quality improvement (QI) project is IRB exempt.

Setting: This quality improvement project took place at a community teaching hospital ED with an on-site inpatient psychiatric unit.

Participants/Subjects: A convenience sample was selected. Participants selected met a sample criterion. Sample criterion included: ED Indicator, Community Teaching Hospital with Psychiatry Unit, arrival date (7/31/15 - 1/31/17), age at arrival (18 years or older), mental disorders, and non-pregnant.

Methods: IBM SPSS statistical software was used for statistical analyses. Alpha was set to .05. A G*power analysis was calculated and required a minimum of 26 charts to be audited. To determine if TAPS scores were related to LOS a Spearman's rho correlation was conducted. The total cost per day for each patient was computed.

Results/Outcomes: A total of 154 charts were initially considered for review. Descriptive statistics (n, %) for TAPS scores across the 101 patients was performed. A one-way ANOVA revealed no statistically significant differences in age, F (5, 95) = .73, p =.60. For systolic and diastolic blood pressure, TAPS score of 3 was significantly different than patients with a TAPS score of 0, 1, and 2. Follow-up comparisons (excluding TAPS = 5 due to only one patient being in this group) for pulse showed significant differences between TAPS of 0 and all other TAPS scoring groups (all p < .05). The overall sensitivity was 71.43% and the specificity was 32.98%. There were 31 patients with a TAPS of 0 that did not have clinically significant laboratory results and 2 patients that had clinically significant results. Chi square tests revealed no statistical significance (all p>.05) between TAPS score and laboratory results, with the exception of TAPS and serum drug screen. This was not a clinically significant finding. A Spearman's rho correlation was calculated and the TAPS scores were not related to LOS in the ED (ρ=.141, p=.160). None of the patients who received a TAPS score of 0 (n=33) were admitted to a medical unit.

Implications: High acuity, laboratory screening tests, and day costs all contribute to increasingly high costs when psychiatric patients are 'boarded' in the ED. Use of the TAPS tool can be a method to decrease costs and improve ED throughput 30-32. Those patients who do not have indications for medical screening tests by the TAPS tool (TAPS of 0) could have a shorter time-to-psychiatry referral and overall ED LOS. A clinically meaningful workup for low-risk patients could include an i-STAT™ 6+ (potassium, glucose…..and a urine drug screen. Future considerations should include studying the TAPS tool at a trauma and rural hospital, as well as in the pediatric and addiction population.

Author Details

Jennifer J. Schieferle Uhlenbrock, DNP, MBA, RN; John Hudson, PhD, MSN, RN, NEA-BC, FACHE; Judy Prewitt, DNP, RN, AOCN, NEA-BC; Julie A. Thompson, PhD; Katherine Pereira, DNP, FNP-BC, FAAN, FAANP

Sigma Membership

Non-member

Type

Poster

Format Type

Text-based Document

Study Design/Type

Quality Improvement

Research Approach

Translational Research/Evidence-based Practice

Keywords:

Psychiatric, MSE Screening, Triage Tool

Conference Name

Emergency Nursing 2018

Conference Host

Emergency Nurses Association

Conference Location

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

Conference Year

2018

Rights Holder

All rights reserved by the author(s) and/or publisher(s) listed in this item record unless relinquished in whole or part by a rights notation or a Creative Commons License present in this item record.

All permission requests should be directed accordingly and not to the Sigma Repository.

All submitting authors or publishers have affirmed that when using material in their work where they do not own copyright, they have obtained permission of the copyright holder prior to submission and the rights holder has been acknowledged as necessary.

Review Type

Abstract Review Only: Reviewed by Event Host

Acquisition

Proxy-submission

Share

COinS
 

Retrospective chart review of the Triage Algorithm for Psychiatric Screening (TAPS) for patients who present to emergency departments with psychiatric chief complaints

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

Purpose: The purpose of this quality improvement project is to replicate the Miller et.al (2012) study and evaluate if the TAPS tool can identify patients with an absence of a serious medical illness at a community teaching hospital ED with an on-site inpatient psychiatric unit.

Design: A non-experimental, retrospective overlay of the TAPS tool was done to evaluate its value in the triage process. This quality improvement (QI) project is IRB exempt.

Setting: This quality improvement project took place at a community teaching hospital ED with an on-site inpatient psychiatric unit.

Participants/Subjects: A convenience sample was selected. Participants selected met a sample criterion. Sample criterion included: ED Indicator, Community Teaching Hospital with Psychiatry Unit, arrival date (7/31/15 - 1/31/17), age at arrival (18 years or older), mental disorders, and non-pregnant.

Methods: IBM SPSS statistical software was used for statistical analyses. Alpha was set to .05. A G*power analysis was calculated and required a minimum of 26 charts to be audited. To determine if TAPS scores were related to LOS a Spearman's rho correlation was conducted. The total cost per day for each patient was computed.

Results/Outcomes: A total of 154 charts were initially considered for review. Descriptive statistics (n, %) for TAPS scores across the 101 patients was performed. A one-way ANOVA revealed no statistically significant differences in age, F (5, 95) = .73, p =.60. For systolic and diastolic blood pressure, TAPS score of 3 was significantly different than patients with a TAPS score of 0, 1, and 2. Follow-up comparisons (excluding TAPS = 5 due to only one patient being in this group) for pulse showed significant differences between TAPS of 0 and all other TAPS scoring groups (all p < .05). The overall sensitivity was 71.43% and the specificity was 32.98%. There were 31 patients with a TAPS of 0 that did not have clinically significant laboratory results and 2 patients that had clinically significant results. Chi square tests revealed no statistical significance (all p>.05) between TAPS score and laboratory results, with the exception of TAPS and serum drug screen. This was not a clinically significant finding. A Spearman's rho correlation was calculated and the TAPS scores were not related to LOS in the ED (ρ=.141, p=.160). None of the patients who received a TAPS score of 0 (n=33) were admitted to a medical unit.

Implications: High acuity, laboratory screening tests, and day costs all contribute to increasingly high costs when psychiatric patients are 'boarded' in the ED. Use of the TAPS tool can be a method to decrease costs and improve ED throughput 30-32. Those patients who do not have indications for medical screening tests by the TAPS tool (TAPS of 0) could have a shorter time-to-psychiatry referral and overall ED LOS. A clinically meaningful workup for low-risk patients could include an i-STAT™ 6+ (potassium, glucose…..and a urine drug screen. Future considerations should include studying the TAPS tool at a trauma and rural hospital, as well as in the pediatric and addiction population.