Search

BackgroundTechnology-based systems can facilitate remote decision-making to triage patients to the appropriate level of care. Despite technologic advances, the effects of implementation of these systems on patient and utilization outcomes are unclear. We evaluated the effects of remote triage systems on healthcare utilization, case resolution, and patient safety outcomes.MethodsEnglish-language searches of MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and CINAHL were performed from inception until July 2018. Randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies of remote triage services that reported healthcare utilization, case resolution, and patient safety outcomes were included. Two reviewers assessed study and intervention characteristics independently for study quality, strength of evidence, and risk of bias.ResultsThe literature search identified 5026 articles, of which eight met eligibility criteria. Five randomized, two controlled before-and-after, and one interrupted time series study assessed 3 categories of remote triage services: mode of delivery, triage professional type, and system organizational level. No study evaluated any other delivery mode other than telephone and in-person. Meta-analyses were unable to be performed because of study design and outcome heterogeneity; therefore, we narratively synthesized data. Overall, most studies did not demonstrate a decrease in primary care (PC) or emergency department (ED) utilization, with some studies showing a significant increase. Evidence suggested local, practice-based triage systems have greater case resolution and refer fewer patients to PC or ED services than regional/national systems. No study identified statistically significant differences in safety outcomes.ConclusionOur review found limited evidence that remote triage reduces the burden of PC or ED utilization. However, remote triage by telephone can produce a high rate of call resolution and appears to be safe. Further study of other remote triage modalities is needed to realize the promise of remote triage services in optimizing healthcare outcomes.Protocol registrationThis study was registered and followed a published protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42019112262).

Background: Technology-based systems can facilitate remote decision-making to triage patients to the appropriate level of care. Despite technologic advances, the effects of implementation of these systems on patient and utilization outcomes are unclear. We evaluated the effects of remote triage systems on healthcare utilization, case resolution, and patient safety outcomes.Methods: English-language searches of MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and CINAHL were performed from inception until July 2018. Randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies of remote triage services that reported healthcare utilization, case resolution, and patient safety outcomes were included. Two reviewers assessed study and intervention characteristics independently for study quality, strength of evidence, and risk of bias.Results: The literature search identified 5026 articles, of which eight met eligibility criteria. Five randomized, two controlled before-and-after, and one interrupted time series study assessed 3 categories of remote triage services: mode of delivery, triage professional type, and system organizational level. No study evaluated any other delivery mode other than telephone and in-person. Meta-analyses were unable to be performed because of study design and outcome heterogeneity; therefore, we narratively synthesized data. Overall, most studies did not demonstrate a decrease in primary care (PC) or emergency department (ED) utilization, with some studies showing a significant increase. Evidence suggested local, practice-based triage systems have greater case resolution and refer fewer patients to PC or ED services than regional/national systems. No study identified statistically significant differences in safety outcomes.Conclusion: Our review found limited evidence that remote triage reduces the burden of PC or ED utilization. However, remote triage by telephone can produce a high rate of call resolution and appears to be safe. Further study of other remote triage modalities is needed to realize the promise of remote triage services in optimizing healthcare outcomes.Protocol Registration: This study was registered and followed a published protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42019112262). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Active adults commonly present with lower extremity (LE) injuries from a variety of professional and amateur sports activities. Decreased LE function significantly alters daily life and subsequent injuries increase this impact. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the association between previous injury and the risk of re-injury, and to describe the changes in kinematics and motor programming that may contribute to this relationship. Methods: A preliminary search was conducted to determine the four most common LE injuries on PubMed, CINAHL and Web of Science. These injuries, in a healthy active adult population, were hamstring strain (HS), anterior cruciate ligament injury (ACL), achilles tendon pathology, and ankle sprain. After these injuries were established, the search for this systematic review found evidence relating these injuries to re-injury. Articles related to degenerative changes were excluded. Twenty-six articles were included in the systematic review detailing the risk of re-injury from a previous injury and were graded for quality. Results: ACL injury was linked to a successive injury of the same ACL, and other injuries in the LE. HS was associated with subsequent ipsilateral HS and knee injuries. Previous achilles tendon rupture increased the risk of an analogous injury on the contralateral side. An ankle sprain was associated with a re-injury of either the ipsilateral or the contralateral ankle. Post-injury changes were present in strength, proprioception, and kinematics, which may have led to overall changes in motor control and function. Conclusion: This review provides insight into the changes occurring following common LE injuries, how these changes potentially affect risk for future injury, and address the needs of the active adult population in rehabilitation. Clinical Relevance: Current research on previous injury and re-injury is of high quality, but scarce quantity. Deficits following an injury are known, but how these deficits correlate or lead to re-injury requires further exploration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]