This paper presents a workplace study of triage work practices within an emergency department (ED). We examine the practices, procedures, and organization in which ED staff uses tools and technologies when coordinating the essential activity of assessing and sorting patients arriving at the ED. The paper provides in-depth empirical observations describing the situated work practices of triage work, and the complex collaborative nature of the triage process. We identify and conceptualize triage work practices as comprising patient trajectories, triage nurse activities, coordinative artefacts and exception handling; we also articulate how these four features of triage practices constitute and connect workflows, organize and re-organize time and space during the triage process. Finally we conceptualize these connections as an assessing and sorting mechanism in collaborative work. We argue that the complexities involved in this mechanism are a necessary asset of triage work, which calls for a reassessment of the concept of triage drift.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
The scale is endorsed by the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP), National Emergency Nurses Affiliation of Canada (NENA) and L’association des Medecins d’urgence du Quebec (AMUQ).
MD refers to Medical Doctor. Fellows working in the ED are MDs with pediatric as specialty in the process of becoming emergency physicians. Residents are MDs specializing in various areas not including pediatric emergency. They might be adult ED physicians or General practitioners who take a turn in a pediatric ED increasing their pediatric qualifications. Medical students are in the process of becoming MDs.
Pediatric CTAS guidelines.
During day time the charge nurse is a CNC: Clinical Nurse Coordinator.
Resuscitation patients (CTAS 1) go directly to the trauma room for treatment and assessment without wasting time to fill out paper forms.
In some case additional documents will also be started at triage, such as initiated nursing protocols or nursing x-ray orders. In these cases these extra documents will also be included in the package for the registration clerk.
Andersson, A.-K., M. Omberg and M. Svedlund (2006): Triage in the Emergency Department—A Qualitative Study of the Factors Which Nurses Consider When Making Decisions. British Association of Critical Care Nurses. Nursing in Critical Care, vol. 11(3), pp. 136–145, doi:10.1111/j.1362-1017.2006.00162.x.
Balka, E. and S. Whitehouse (2007): Whose Work Practice? Situating an Electronic Triage System Within a Complex System. In J. Aarts (ed): Socio-technical Approaches to Health Informatics. Studies in Health Technology and InformaticsAmsterdam, Netherlands: IOS.
Bardram, J.E. (2000): Temporal Coordination, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). International Journal (Toronto, Ont.), vol. 9, pp. 157–187.
Berg, M. (1998): The Politics of Technology: On Bringing Theory into Technological Design. Science, Technology, & Human Values, vol. 23(4), pp. 456–490.
Beveridge, R., B. Clarke, L. Janes, N. Savage, J. Thompson, G. Dodd et al. (1998): Implemention Guidelines for The Canadian Emergency Department Triage & Acuity Scale (CTAS) (No. CTAS16), Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP), National Emergency Nurses Affiliation of Canada (NENA) and L’association des Medecins d’urgence du Quebec (AMUQ).
Bjørn, P. (2008): Canadian Children’s Emergency Departments: Triage Practice & Electronic Triage Systems, Burnaby, School of Communication, ACTION for Health, Simon Fraser University.
Bjørn, P. and E. Balka (2007): Health Care Categories Have Politics too: Unpacking the Managerial Agendas of Electronic Triage Systems. In L. Bannon, I. Wagner, C. Gutwin, R. Harper and K. Schmidt (eds): ECSCW 2007: Proceedings of the Tenth European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative WorkIreland: Limerick, pp. 371–390.
Clarke, K., J. Hughes, M. Rouncefield and T. Hemmings (2006): When a Bed Is Not a Bed: Calculation and Calculability in Complex Organisational Settings. In K. Clark, G. Hardstone, M. Rouncefield and I. Sommerville (eds): Trust in Technology: A Socio-technical Perspective Netherlands: Springer, pp. 21–38.
Dong, S., M. Bullard, D. Meuer, S. Blitz, A. Ohinmaa, B. Holroyd et al (2006a): Predictive Validity of a Computerized Emergency Triage Tool. Academic Emergency Medicine, vol. 13(5), p. 307, doi:10.1197/j.aem.2006.03.366.
Dong, S., M. Bullard, D. Meuer, S. Blitz, A. Ohinmaa, B. Holroyd et al (2006b): Reliability of Computerized Emergency Triage. Academic Emergency Medicine, vol. 13(3), pp. 269–275.
Eggertson, L. (2004): ED Problems Results of Bed Shortages, Doctors Contend. Canadian Medical Association Journal, vol. 170(11), pp. 1653–1654CMAJ, doi:10.1503/cmaj.1040614.
Gerson, E.M. and S.L. Star (1986): Analyzing Due Process in the Workplace. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, vol. 4(3), pp. 257–270, doi:10.1145/214427.214431.
Glaser, B.G. and A.L. Strauss (1967): The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Goorman, E. and M. Berg (2000): Modelling Nursing Activities: Electronic Patient Records and Their Discontents. Nursing Inquiry, vol. 7(1), pp. 3–9, doi:10.1046/j.1440-1800.2000.00053.x.
Grafstein, E., B. Unger, M. Bullard and G. Innes (2006): Canadian Emergency Department Information System (CEDIS), Presenting Complaint List (Version 1.0). Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine (CJEM), vol. 5(1), pp. 1–13.
Heath, C., H. Knoblauch and P. Luff (2000): Technology and Social Interaction: The Emergence of Workplace Studies. The British Journal of Sociology, vol. 51(2), pp. 299–320, doi:10.1080/00071310050030190.
Heath, C. and P. Luff (1992): Collaboration and Control: Crisis Management and Multimedia Technology in London Underground Line Control Rooms. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). International Journal (Toronto, Ont.), vol. 1, pp. 69–94.
Heath, C., P. Luff and M.S. Svensson (2003): Technology and Medical Practice. Sociology of Health & Illness, vol. 25, pp. 75–96.
Innes, G., M. Murray and E. Grafstein (2001): A Consensus-based Process to Define Standard National Data Elements for a Canadian Emergency Department Information Systems. Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine (CJEM), vol. 3(4), pp. 277–284.
Jiménez, J.G., M. Murray, R. Beveridge, J.P. Pons, E.A. Cortés, J.B.F. Garrigós et al (2003): Implementation of the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) in the Principality of Andorra: Can Triage Parameters Serve as Emergency Department Quality Indicators? Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine (CJEM), vol. 5(5), pp. 315–322.
Kobayashi, M., S. Fussell, Y. Xiao and J. Seagull (2005): Work Coordination, Workflow, and Workarounds in a Medical Context, Computer Human Interaction (CHI). Portland, Oregon, USA: ACM.
Law, J. (2004): After Method: Mess Is Social Science Research. London: Routledge.
Luff, P., J. Hindmarch, and C. Heath (eds) (2000): Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MedicineNet.com. (2007): MedicineNet.com retrieved on May 24, 2007, Retrieved May 24, 2007, http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=16736.
Orlikowski, W. (1995): Categories: Concept, Content and Context. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). International Journal (Toronto, Ont.), vol. 3, pp. 73–78.
Orlikowski, W.J. (1993): CASE Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating Incremental and Radical Changes in Systems Development. MIS Quarterly, vol. 17(3), pp. 309–340, doi:10.2307/249774.
Ospina, M., K. Bond, M. Schull, G. Innes, S. Blitz, C. Friesen, et al. (2006): Technology Report: Measuring Overcrowding in Emergency Departments—A Call for Standardization [Technology report no 67.1], Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologica in Health, Ottawa: Canada.
Plowman, L., Y. Rogers and M. Ramage (1995): What Are Workplace Studies for? University of Sussex: Lancaster.
Schmidt, K. (1998): The Critical Role of Workplace Studies in CSCW. In C. Heath, J. Hindmarsh and P. Luff (eds): Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing Design.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schmidt, K. and L. Bannon (1992): Taking CSCW Seriously: Supporting Articulation Work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). International Journal (Toronto, Ont.), vol. 1(1–2), pp. 7–40.
Schmidt, K. and C. Simone (1996): Coordination Mechanisms: Towards a Conceptual Foundation of CSCW System Design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). International Journal (Toronto, Ont.), vol. 5, pp. 155–200.
Strauss, A., S. Fagerhaugh, B. Suczek and C. Wiener (1985): Social Organization of Medical Work. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Suchman, L. (1987): Plans and Situated Actions. The Problem of Human Machine Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Suchman, L. (1995): Making Work Visible. Communications of the ACM, vol. 38(9), pp. 56–64, doi:10.1145/223248.223263.
Timmermans, S. and M. Berg (2003): The Practice of Medical Technology. Sociology of Health & Illness, vol. 25, pp. 97–114.
Tjora, A.H. (2000): The Technological Mediation of the Nursing-medical Boundary. Sociology of Health & Illness, vol. 22(6), pp. 721–741, doi:10.1111/1467-9566.00228.
This study was conducted as a part of the research project ACTION for Health. ACTION for Health is funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Grant #512-2003-1017, titled ‘The role of technology in the production, consumption and use of health information: Implications for policy and practice’ with contributions from Simon Fraser University and Vancouver General Hospital.
About this article
Cite this article
Bjørn, P., Rødje, K. Triage Drift: A Workplace Study in a Pediatric Emergency Department. Comput Supported Coop Work 17, 395–419 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-008-9079-2