Literature DB >> 12435927

American College of Surgeons, Committee on Trauma Verification Review: does it really make a difference?

Peter F Ehrlich1, Sherry Rockwell, Stephanie Kincaid, Peter Mucha.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although not directly involved in designation per se, the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Committee on Trauma verification/consultation program in conjunction with has set the national standards for trauma care. This study analyzes the impact of a recent verification process on an academic health center.
METHODS: Performance improvement data were generated monthly from the hospital trauma registry. Forty-seven clinical indicators were reviewed. Three study periods were defined for comparative purposes: PRE (January, June, October 1997), before verification/consultation; CON (April 1999-October 1999), after reorganization; and VER (November 1999-September 2000), from consultation to verification.
RESULTS: Statistically significant (p < 0.05) quantitative and qualitative changes were observed in numbers (percent) of patients reaching clinical criteria. These included prehospital, emergency department, and hospital-based trauma competencies. Trauma patient evaluation (including radiology) and disposition out of the emergency department (< 120 minutes) improved in each study section (PRE, 21%; CON, 48%; VER, 76%). Enhanced nursing documentation correlated with improved clinical care such as early acquisition of head computed axial tomographic scans in neurologic injured patients (PRE, 66%; CON, 97%; VER, 95%). Intensive care unit length of stay (< 7 days) decreased (PRE, 87%; VER, 97.8%). Other transformations included increase in institutional morale with recognition of trauma excellence within the hospital and resurgence of the trauma research programs (60 institutional review board-approved projects).
CONCLUSION: The ACS verification/consultation program had a positive influence on this developing academic trauma program. Preparation for ACS verification/consultation resulted in significant improvements in patient care, enhancement of institutional pride, and commitment to care of the injured patient.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12435927     DOI: 10.1097/00005373-200211000-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Trauma        ISSN: 0022-5282


  6 in total

1.  OOSTT: a Resource for Analyzing the Organizational Structures of Trauma Centers and Trauma Systems.

Authors:  Joseph Utecht; John Judkins; J Neil Otte; Terra Colvin; Nicholas Rogers; Robert Rose; Maria Alvi; Amanda Hicks; Jane Ball; Stephen M Bowman; Robert T Maxson; Rosemary Nabaweesi; Rohit Pradhan; Nels D Sanddal; M Eduard Tudoreanu; Robert J Winchell; Mathias Brochhausen
Journal:  CEUR Workshop Proc       Date:  2016-08

2.  Verified centers, nonverified centers, or other facilities: a national analysis of burn patient treatment location.

Authors:  David Zonies; Christopher Mack; Bradley Kramer; Frederick Rivara; Matthew Klein
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 6.113

3.  Complication rates among trauma centers.

Authors:  Darwin N Ang; Frederick P Rivara; Avery Nathens; Gregory J Jurkovich; Ronald V Maier; Jin Wang; Ellen J MacKenzie
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2009-09-19       Impact factor: 6.113

Review 4.  Management of Critical Burn Injuries: Recent Developments.

Authors:  David J Dries; John J Marini
Journal:  Korean J Crit Care Med       Date:  2017-02-17

5.  Effectiveness of trauma centre verification: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Brice Batomen; Lynne Moore; Mabel Carabali; Pier-Alexandre Tardif; Howard Champion; Arijit Nandi
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2021-01-15       Impact factor: 2.089

6.  Management of burn injuries--recent developments in resuscitation, infection control and outcomes research.

Authors:  David J Dries
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2009-03-11       Impact factor: 2.953

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.