Obstetric Triage Scales; a Narrative Review

Introduction: The growing demand for high-quality obstetric care and treatment has led to the advent and development of a field known as obstetric triage. The present review study aimed to examine the development of tools and criteria for obstetric triage services. Methods: In this narrative review, two authors searched for related articles using the keywords of “obstetric triage, gynecology triage, perinatal Triage, maternity triage, midwifery triage†AND “tool, index, scale, questionnaire, systemâ€. With Persian and English language limitation, searches were performed in Scopus, Google Scholar, Scientific Information Database, ProQuest, Medline, Embase and Web of Science databases for articles published from 2000 to 2018. Results: Out of the 289 articles reviewed in this study, 8 articles met the eligibility criteria. Out of these 8 articles, 6 were dedicated to introducing a tool designed and only 2 introduced an obstetric triage system. The obstetric triage tools and systems covered included Emergency Severity Index (ESI), Obstetric Triage Acuity Scale (OTAS), Birmingham symptom specific obstetric triage system (BSOTS), Maternal Fetal Triage Index (MFTI), Florida Hospital Obstetric Triage Acuity Tool, self-assessment questionnaire for gynecologic emergencies (SAQ-GE) and Perinatal Emergency Team Response Assessment (PETRA). Overall, the validity and reliability of the studied method were investigated and found to be acceptable in only 5 of the reviewed studies. Conclusion: The review showed the lack of consensus on how to devise a single standardized tool or system for obstetric triage. The comparison of different obstetric triage tools and systems demonstrated the need for a standardized and widely-approved system with high validity and reliability and standard definitions for obstetric triage to determine the right priority and waiting times of obstetric care services.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

1. 13.

   Emergency Department Triage Scales and Their Components: A Systematic Review of the Scientific Evidence · 2011

26 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.