Racial differences in triage assessment at rural vs urban Maine emergency departments

Data continue to accumulate demonstrating that those belonging to racialized groups face implicit bias in the emergency care delivery system across many indices, including triage assessment. The Emergency Severity Index (ESI) was developed and widely implemented across the US to improve the objectivity of triage assessment and prioritization of care delivery; however, research continues to support the presence of subjective bias in triage assessment. We sought to assess the relationship between perceived race and/or need for translator and assigned ESI score and whether this was impacted by hospital geography. We performed retrospective EMR-based review of patients presenting to urban and rural emergency departments of a health system in Maine with one of the top ten most common chief complaints (CC) across a 5-year period, excluding psychiatric CCs. We used multivariable regression to analyze the relationships between perceived race, need for translator, and gender with ESI score, wait time, and hallway bed assignments. We found that patients perceived as non-white were more likely to receive lower acuity ESI scores and have longer wait times as compared to patients perceived as white. Patients perceived as female were more likely to receive lower acuity scores and wait longer to be seen than patients perceived as male. The need for an interpreter was associated with increased wait times but not significantly associated with ESI score. After stratification by hospital geography, evidence of subjective bias was limited to urban emergency departments and was not evident in rural emergency departments. Further investigation of subjective bias in emergency departments in Maine, particularly in urban settings, is warranted.