Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Nov;39(11):1916-24.
doi: 10.1007/s00134-013-3033-6. Epub 2013 Aug 8.

Triage of intensive care patients: identifying agreement and controversy

Charles L Sprung  1 , Marion Danis, Gaetano Iapichino, Antonio Artigas, Jozef Kesecioglu, Rui Moreno, Anne Lippert, J Randall Curtis, Paula Meale, Simon L Cohen, Mitchell M Levy, Robert D Truog
Affiliations

Triage of intensive care patients: identifying agreement and controversy

Charles L Sprung et al. Intensive Care Med. 2013 Nov.

Abstract

Rationale: Intensive care unit (ICU) resources are limited in many hospitals. Patients with little likelihood of surviving are often admitted to ICUs. Others who might benefit from ICU are not admitted.

Objective: To provide an updated consensus statement on the principles and recommendations for the triage of patients for ICU beds.

Design: The previous Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) consensus statement was used to develop drafts of general and specific principles and recommendations. Investigators and consultants were sent the statements and responded with their agreement or disagreement.

Setting: The Eldicus project (triage decision making for the elderly in European intensive care units).

Participants: Eldicus investigators, consultants, and experts consisting of intensivists, users of ICU services, ethicists, administrators, and public policy officials.

Interventions: Consensus development was used to grade the statements and recommendations.

Measurements and main results: Consensus was defined as 80% agreement or more. Consensus was obtained for 54 (87%) of 62 statements including all (19) general principles, 31 (86%) of the specific principles, and 10 (71%) of the recommendations. Inconsistencies in responses were noted for ICU admission and discharge. Despite agreement for guidelines applying to individual patients and an objective triage score, there was no agreement for a survival cutoff for triage, not even for a chance of survival of 0.1%.

Conclusions: Consensus was reached for most general and specific ICU triage principles and recommendations. Further debate and discussion should help resolve the remaining discrepancies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The spectrum of intensive care triage. From Levin and Sprung [32]
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The consensus development process
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Society of Critical Care Medicine. Ethics Committee. Consensus statement on the triage of critically ill patients. JAMA. 1994;271:1200–1203. - PubMed
    1. Metcalfe MA, Sloggett A, McPherson K. Mortality among appropriately referred patients refused admission to intensive care units. Lancet. 1997;350:7–11. - PubMed
    1. Sprung CL, Geber D, Eidelman LA, Baras M, Pizov R, Nimrod A, Oppenheim A, Epstein L, Cotev S. Evaluation of triage decisions for intensive care admission. Crit Care Med. 1999;27:1073–1079. - PubMed
    1. Joynt GM, Gomersall CD, Tan P, Lee A, Cheng CA, Wong EL. Prospective evaluation of patients refused admission to an intensive care unit: triage, futility and outcome. Intensive Care Med. 2001;27:1459–1465. - PubMed
    1. Simchen E, Sprung CL, Galai N, Zitser-Gurevich Y, Bar-Lavi Y, Gurman G, Klein M, Lev A, Levi L, Zveibil F, Mandel M, Mnatzaganian G. Survival of critically ill patients hospitalized in and out of intensive care units under paucity of intensive care unit beds. Crit Care Med. 2004;32:1654–1661. - PubMed

Publication types