Digital versus analogue record systems for mass casualty incidents at sea-Results from an exploratory study

Esther Henning; Mustafa Sinan Bakir; Lyubomir Haralambiev; Simon Kim; Stefan Schulz-Drost; Peter Hinz; Thomas Kohlmann; Axel Ekkernkamp; Denis Gümbel

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0234156

Digital versus analogue record systems for mass casualty incidents at sea-Results from an exploratory study

PLoS One. 2020 Jun 5;15(6):e0234156. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234156. eCollection 2020.

Authors

Esther Henning¹, Mustafa Sinan Bakir^{1

2}, Lyubomir Haralambiev^{1

2}, Simon Kim¹, Stefan Schulz-Drost³, Peter Hinz¹, Thomas Kohlmann⁴, Axel Ekkernkamp^{1

2}, Denis Gümbel^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Trauma, Reconstructive Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
² Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, BG Klinikum Unfallkrankenhaus Berlin gGmbH, Berlin, Germany.
³ Department of Trauma Surgery, Helios Kliniken Schwerin, Schwerin, Germany.
⁴ Institute for Community Medicine, Section Methods in Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Germany.

Abstract

Objective: Mis-triage may have serious consequences for patients in mass casualty incidents (MCI) at sea. The purpose of this study was to assess outcome, reliability and validity of an analogue and a digital recording system for triage of a MCI at sea.

Methods: The study based on a triage exercise conducted with a cross-over-design. Forty-eight volunteers were presented a fictional MCI with 50 cases. The volunteers were randomly assigned to start with the analogue (Group A, starting with the analogue followed by the digital system) or digital system (Group B, starting with the digital followed by the analogue system). Triage score distribution and agreement between the triage methods and a predefined standard were reported. Reliability was analysed using Cronbach's Alpha and Cohen's Kappa. Validity was measured through sensitivity, specificity and predictive value. Treatment, period and carry-over-effects were analysed using a linear mixed-effects model.

Results: The number of patients triaged (total: n = 3545) with the analogue system (n = 1914; 79.75%) was significantly higher (p = 0.001) than with the digital system (n = 1631; 67.96%). A trend towards a higher percentage of correct triages with the digital system was observed (p = 0.282). Ratio of under-triage was significantly smaller with the digital system (p = 0.001). Validity measured with Cronbach's Alpha and Cohen's Kappa was higher with the digital system. So was sensitivity (category; green: 80.67%, yellow: 73.24%, red: 83.54%; analogue: green: 93.28%, yellow: 82.36%, red: 94.04%) and specificity of the digital system (green: 78.07%, yellow: 63.75%, red: 66.25%; analogue: green: 85.50%, yellow: 79.88%, red: 91.50%). Comparing the predictive values and accuracy, the digital system showed higher scores than the analogue system. No significant patterns of carry-over-effects were observed.

Conclusions: Significant differences were found for the number of triages comparing the analogue and digital recording system. The digital system has a slightly higher reliability and validity than the analogue triage system.

Publication types

Comparative Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Adult
Female
Humans
Linear Models
Male
Mass Casualty Incidents / statistics & numerical data*
Oceans and Seas*
Records*
Young Adult

Grants and funding

We acknowledge support for carrying out the study from the BMBF (Federal Ministry of Education and Research, https://www.bmbf.de, grant number 13N13256) as well as for the Article Processing Charge from the DFG (German Research Foundation https://dfg.de, grant number 393148499) and the Open Access Publication Fund of the University of Greifswald. Both funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.