Main Article Content
Objectives: To assess time saving in an Emergency Department arising out of the introduction of automatic devices (Carescape™ V100) to measure vital signs compared to the manual devices. Methods: We performed a prospective, observational study of eligible patients referring to Sant’Andrea Hospital Emergency Department during the entire month of October 2009, randomly assigned into two groups. In the first group of 476 patients vital signs measurements were detected with manual devices, while in the second group of 477 patients with automatic device Carescape™ V100. Results: Data indicated that the comparison of the total time between the two groups gave a significant difference (1993 vs 1518 min, p < 0.001). No differences were found with respect to age, sex and priority codes. Significant differences were also found when comparing the subgroups of the same acuity categories: white codes 4.33 vs 2.27 (min), p < 0.05; green codes 4.28 vs 3.37 (min), p < 0.001; yellow codes 3.92 vs 2.72 (min), p < 0.001. Conclusions: Our data demonstrated a statistical significance between the two groups with a difference of 475 minutes spent in Triage procedures including vital signs measurements. In conclusion time saved by vital signs automatic device could allow ED physicians to make a qualified approach with an earlier diagnosis and a more rapid and effective therapy, possibly improving patients’ outcomes. ABSTRACT of data concerning vital signs quality assessment, because we did not compare the two methods in the same patient and we did not correlate Triage priority evaluation with patients’ outcomes. In the future further studies should be specifically aimed to address this issue. In conclusion time saved by vital signs automatic device could allow ED physicians to make a qualified approach to patient with an earlier diagnosis and a more rapid and effective therapy, possibly improving patients’ outcomes.
Downloads month by month
Download data is not yet available.