Safety and accuracy of digitally supported primary and secondary urgent care telephone triage in England: an observational study using routine data
Safety and accuracy of digitally supported primary and secondary urgent care telephone triage in England: an observational study using routine data
Background: England’s urgent care telephone triage system comprises non-clinician-led primary triage (NHS111) assessment followed, for approximately 50% patients, by clinician-led secondary triage. Digital decision support is utilised by both. We explore the system’s safety and accuracy relative to patients’ use of emergency departments (EDs) and in-patient care in the subsequent 24 h.
Methods: descriptive analyses were used to investigate outcomes of 98,946 calls that underwent primary and secondary triage. We investigated sensitivity (safety) and specificity (efficiency/accuracy) in relation to subsequent ED attendance and in-patient hospital admission. Mixed effects regression models were used to explore potential under-estimation of clinical risk (under-triage).
Results: sensitivity was greater in primary triage, whilst specificity was greater in secondary triage. The positive predictive value for attending ED after being assigned a triage urgency level of within 2 h was 46.0% for secondary triage compared to 20.7% for primary triage; for inpatient admission it was 18.0% and 9.2% respectively. 1.5% (n = 1468) patients triaged to same-day or less urgent care at secondary triage were subsequently admitted for in-patient care. In relation to in-patient admission within 24 h, there were greater odds of potential under-triage for calls made between midnight and 6am, and for shorter duration calls, respectively OR = 1.71; CI:1.32–2.21 and OR: 1.66, CI: 1.30–2.11. The service provider (e.g., service provider 2, OR = 5.61; CI:3.36–9.36) and individual clinician (OR covering the 95% midrange = 16.15) conducting triage were the characteristics most greatly associated with this potential under-triage; p < 0.001 for all.
Conclusions: clinician-led urgent care triage is more accurate in identifying the likelihood of a need for ED or in-patient care than non-clinician triage. Non-clinician primary triage is risk averse, reflected in its high sensitivity but low specificity. Service and clinician characteristics associated with potential under-triage need further investigation to inform ways of improving the safety and effectiveness of urgent care telephone triage. Clinical trial number: Not applicable.
Digital triage, Emergencies, NHS 111, Primary health care, Urgent care
Sexton, Vanashree
eacf0d1e-66e8-45e3-82bb-c8d79b3a0d11
Grimley, Catherine
813531d5-e9be-4fb8-a94d-e4bd8f256dbd
Dale, Jeremy
19fccbd2-1661-4d84-8a94-36bedb12a0e2
Atherton, Helen
9bb8932e-7bb7-4781-ab97-114613de99b1
Abel, Gary
d14838f4-2a59-4dec-b3ac-527030888e44
Sexton, Vanashree
eacf0d1e-66e8-45e3-82bb-c8d79b3a0d11
Grimley, Catherine
813531d5-e9be-4fb8-a94d-e4bd8f256dbd
Dale, Jeremy
19fccbd2-1661-4d84-8a94-36bedb12a0e2
Atherton, Helen
9bb8932e-7bb7-4781-ab97-114613de99b1
Abel, Gary
d14838f4-2a59-4dec-b3ac-527030888e44
Sexton, Vanashree, Grimley, Catherine, Dale, Jeremy, Atherton, Helen and Abel, Gary
(2025)
Safety and accuracy of digitally supported primary and secondary urgent care telephone triage in England: an observational study using routine data.
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 25 (1), [52].
(doi:10.1186/s12911-025-02888-x).
Abstract
Background: England’s urgent care telephone triage system comprises non-clinician-led primary triage (NHS111) assessment followed, for approximately 50% patients, by clinician-led secondary triage. Digital decision support is utilised by both. We explore the system’s safety and accuracy relative to patients’ use of emergency departments (EDs) and in-patient care in the subsequent 24 h.
Methods: descriptive analyses were used to investigate outcomes of 98,946 calls that underwent primary and secondary triage. We investigated sensitivity (safety) and specificity (efficiency/accuracy) in relation to subsequent ED attendance and in-patient hospital admission. Mixed effects regression models were used to explore potential under-estimation of clinical risk (under-triage).
Results: sensitivity was greater in primary triage, whilst specificity was greater in secondary triage. The positive predictive value for attending ED after being assigned a triage urgency level of within 2 h was 46.0% for secondary triage compared to 20.7% for primary triage; for inpatient admission it was 18.0% and 9.2% respectively. 1.5% (n = 1468) patients triaged to same-day or less urgent care at secondary triage were subsequently admitted for in-patient care. In relation to in-patient admission within 24 h, there were greater odds of potential under-triage for calls made between midnight and 6am, and for shorter duration calls, respectively OR = 1.71; CI:1.32–2.21 and OR: 1.66, CI: 1.30–2.11. The service provider (e.g., service provider 2, OR = 5.61; CI:3.36–9.36) and individual clinician (OR covering the 95% midrange = 16.15) conducting triage were the characteristics most greatly associated with this potential under-triage; p < 0.001 for all.
Conclusions: clinician-led urgent care triage is more accurate in identifying the likelihood of a need for ED or in-patient care than non-clinician triage. Non-clinician primary triage is risk averse, reflected in its high sensitivity but low specificity. Service and clinician characteristics associated with potential under-triage need further investigation to inform ways of improving the safety and effectiveness of urgent care telephone triage. Clinical trial number: Not applicable.
Text
s12911-025-02888-x
- Version of Record
More information
e-pub ahead of print date: 3 February 2025
Keywords:
Digital triage, Emergencies, NHS 111, Primary health care, Urgent care
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 498903
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/498903
ISSN: 1472-6947
PURE UUID: a3e4acbf-7a03-43a2-aaf0-4da401d2d68a
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 04 Mar 2025 17:54
Last modified: 05 Mar 2025 03:15
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Vanashree Sexton
Author:
Catherine Grimley
Author:
Jeremy Dale
Author:
Helen Atherton
Author:
Gary Abel
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics