BACKGROUND: The value of an in-house trauma surgeon is debated. Previous studies focus on comparing in-house and on-call surgeons at different institutions or different periods in time. The purpose of this study was to simultaneously evaluate in-house and on-call trauma surgeons in a single Level I trauma center and to determine the impact of in-house trauma surgeons on the mortality of severely injured patients. METHODS: All records were reviewed for patients classified as major resuscitations from July 1997 through November 1999. Multiple logistic regression was performed to determine predictors of mortality on the basis of trauma surgeon status (in-house vs. on-call) and response time, while controlling for Injury Severity Score (ISS) and Revised Trauma Score. RESULTS: Of the 4,278 admissions, 537 were trauma codes. Mean ISS was 20.16 +/- 11.59. There was no difference between groups admitted by in-house surgeons versus on-call surgeons with respect to ISS or Revised Trauma Score. Mortality for the group was 24.8% (133 of 537); no statistical difference existed between observed and expected mortality by TRISS. The average response time was 3.96 minutes for the in-house group and 14.70 minutes for the on-call group (p < 0.001). Neither the call status nor the response time of the trauma surgeon significantly decreased emergency department or hospital mortality. There was a trend for improved outcome in those patients cared for by an in-house surgeon who were upgraded to a code, transferred into the institution, admitted during the night, or neurologically impaired. This trend did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: When the trauma surgeon was rapidly available (< 15 minutes), there was no difference in emergency department or hospital mortality between in-house and on-call trauma surgeons. Selected subgroups of severely injured patients may benefit from an in-house trauma surgeon. If trauma surgeons are not readily available in an institution, an in-house call policy may be necessary for the prompt resuscitation of critically ill patients.
BACKGROUND: The value of an in-house trauma surgeon is debated. Previous studies focus on comparing in-house and on-call surgeons at different institutions or different periods in time. The purpose of this study was to simultaneously evaluate in-house and on-call trauma surgeons in a single Level I trauma center and to determine the impact of in-house trauma surgeons on the mortality of severely injured patients. METHODS: All records were reviewed for patients classified as major resuscitations from July 1997 through November 1999. Multiple logistic regression was performed to determine predictors of mortality on the basis of trauma surgeon status (in-house vs. on-call) and response time, while controlling for Injury Severity Score (ISS) and Revised Trauma Score. RESULTS: Of the 4,278 admissions, 537 were trauma codes. Mean ISS was 20.16 +/- 11.59. There was no difference between groups admitted by in-house surgeons versus on-call surgeons with respect to ISS or Revised Trauma Score. Mortality for the group was 24.8% (133 of 537); no statistical difference existed between observed and expected mortality by TRISS. The average response time was 3.96 minutes for the in-house group and 14.70 minutes for the on-call group (p < 0.001). Neither the call status nor the response time of the trauma surgeon significantly decreased emergency department or hospital mortality. There was a trend for improved outcome in those patients cared for by an in-house surgeon who were upgraded to a code, transferred into the institution, admitted during the night, or neurologically impaired. This trend did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: When the trauma surgeon was rapidly available (< 15 minutes), there was no difference in emergency department or hospital mortality between in-house and on-call trauma surgeons. Selected subgroups of severely injured patients may benefit from an in-house trauma surgeon. If trauma surgeons are not readily available in an institution, an in-house call policy may be necessary for the prompt resuscitation of critically illpatients.
Authors: Diane L S Hunt; Gina M Berg; Rosalee E Zackula; Francie H Ekengren; Diana Lippoldt; Elizabeth Ablah; Ruth Wetta Journal: J Trauma Manag Outcomes Date: 2013-05-16