Aims and objectives To understand clinical reasoning and decision‐making of triage nurses during telephone conversations with callers suspected of having acute cardiac events, and support from a computer decision support system (CDSS) herewith. Background In telephone triage, nurses assess the urgency of callers’ conditions with clinical reasoning, often supported by CDSS. The use of CDSS may trigger interactional workability dilemmas. Design Qualitative study using principles of a grounded theory approach following COREQ criteria for qualitative research. Methods Audio‐stimulated recall interviews were conducted amongst twenty‐four telephone triage nurses at nine out‐of‐hours primary care centres (OHS‐PC). Results Telephone triage nurses use clinical reasoning elements for urgency assessment. Typically in telephone triage, they interpret the vocal—but not worded—elements in communication (paralanguage) such as tone of voice and shortness of breath and create a mental image to compensate for lack of visual information. We confirmed that interactional workability dilemmas occur. Congruence, established when the CDSS supports the triage nurses’ decision‐making, is essential for the CDSS’ value. If congruence is absent, triage nurses may apply four working strategies: (a) tinker to make CDSS final recommendation align with their own assessment, (b) overrule the CDSS recommendation, (c) comply with the CDSS recommendation or (d) transfer responsibility to the GP. Conclusion Triage nurses who assess urgency may experience absence of congruence between the CDSS and their decision‐making. Awareness of how triage nurses reason and make decisions about urgency and what aspects influence their working strategies can help in achieving optimal triage of callers suspected of acute cardiac events at OHS‐PC. Relevance to clinical practice Triage nurses’ reasoning and their working strategies are vital for outcome of triage decisions. Understanding these processes is essential for CDSS developers and OHS‐PC managers, who should value how triage nurses interact with the CDSS, while they have the benefit of callers in mind.

IntroductionIn the Netherlands, the ‘Netherlands Triage Standard’ (NTS) is frequently used as digital decision support system for telephone triage at out-of-hours services in primary care (OHS-PC). The aim of the NTS is to guarantee accessible, efficient and safe care. However, there are indications that current triage is inefficient, with overestimation of urgency, notably in suspected acute cardiovascular disease. In addition, in primary care settings the NTS has only been validated against surrogate markers, and diagnostic accuracy with clinical outcomes as the reference is unknown. In the Safety First study, we address this gap in knowledge by describing, understanding and improving the diagnostic process and urgency allocation in callers with symptoms suggestive of acute cardiovascular disease, in order to improve both efficiency and safety of telephone triage in this domain.Methods and analysisAn observational study in which 3000 telephone triage recordings (period 2014–2016) will be analysed. Information is collected from the recordings including caller and symptom characteristics and urgency allocation. The callers’ own general practitioners are contacted for the final diagnosis of each contact. We included recordings of callers with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or transient ischaemic attack (TIA)/stroke. With univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses the diagnostic accuracy of caller and symptom characteristics will be analysed in terms of predictive values with urgency level, and ACS and TIA/stroke as outcomes, respectively. To further improve our understanding of the triage process at OHS-PC, we will carry out additional studies applying both quantitative and qualitative methods: (i) case-control study on serious adverse events (SAE), (ii) conversation analysis study and (iii) interview study with triage nurses.Ethics and disseminationThe Medical Ethics Committee Utrecht, the Netherlands endorsed this study (National Trial Register identification: NTR7331). Results will be disseminated at scientific conferences, regional educational sessions and publication in peer-reviewed journals.

ObjectiveTo assess the accuracy of semi-automatic assisted telephone triage in patients with acute chest discomfort against the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or other life-threatening events (LTEs).MethodsA cross-sectional study was performed of telephone conversations with 2023 patients with acute chest discomfort (pain, pressure, tightness or discomfort) who called out-of-hours services for primary care (OHS-PC) between 2014 and 2016. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predicted values were calculated for a high urgency (patient seen within one hour) against the diagnoses of ACS and other LTEs. Diagnoses were retrieved from the patients' medical records in general practice, including hospital specialists' discharge letters.ResultsOf 2023 patients who called because of chest discomfort, 227 (11.2%) had an ACS (men 14.9%, women 8.2%) and 58 (2.9%) had another LTE (men 3.6%, women 2.3%). The sensitivity and specificity of a high Netherlands Triage System (NTS) urgency allocation against ACS/other LTEs were 0.73 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.78) and 0.43 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.45), respectively. In 13.2% of the calls the triage nurse overruled the NTS urgency, mostly by upscaling (11.0%). The sensitivity and specificity of the final urgency allocation were 0.86 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.90) and 0.34 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.37). The positive and negative predictive values of the final urgency were 0.18 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.19) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.95), respectively.ConclusionsThe semi-automatic triage NTS tool underestimated the urgency in 27% of patients with ACS/other LTEs. Overruling by triage nurses improved safety, but still 14% of men and women with ACS/other LTEs received too low urgency, while efficiency remained poor.Trial registration numberNTR7331.

Background The Netherlands Triage Standard (NTS) is a widely used decision support tool for telephone triage at Dutch out-of-hours primary care services (OHS-PC), which, however, has never been validated against clinical outcomes. We aimed to determine the accuracy of the NTS urgency allocation for patients with neurological symptoms suggestive of a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or stroke, with the clinical outcomes TIA, stroke, and other (neurologic) life-threatening events (LTEs) as the reference. Method A cross-sectional study of telephone triage recordings of patients with neurological symptoms calling the OHS-PC between 2014 and 2016.The allocated NTS urgencies were derived from the electronic medical records of the OHS-PC. The clinical outcomes were retrieved from the electronic medical records of the patients’ own general practitioners. The accuracy of a high NTS urgency allocation (medical help within 3 h) was calculated in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) with the clinical outcomes TIA/stroke/other LTEs as the reference. Results Of 1269 patients, 635 (50.0%) received the diagnosis TIA/stroke (34.2% TIA/minor stroke, 15.8% major ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke), and 4.8% other LTEs. For TIA/stroke/other LTEs, the sensitivity and specificity of the NTS urgency allocation were 0.72 (95%CI 0.68–0.75) and 0.48 (95%CI 0.43–0.52), and the PPV and NPV were 0.62 (95%CI 0.60–0.64) and 0.58 (95%CI 0.54–0.62). Conclusions The NTS decision support tool used in Dutch OHS-PC performed poor to moderately regarding safety (sensitivity) and efficiency (specificity) in allocating adequate urgencies to patients with and without TIA/stroke/other LTEs. Trial registration The Netherlands National Trial Register, identification number NTR7331 /Trial NL7134.