Literature DB >> 16699803

Prehospital triage and survival of major trauma patients in a Dutch regional trauma system: relevance of trauma registry.

Leontien M Sturms1, Josephine M Hoogeveen, Saskia Le Cessie, Peter E Schenck, Paul V M Pahlplatz, Mike Hogervorst, Gerrolt N Jukema.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Since 1999, the Dutch trauma care has been regionalized into ten trauma systems. This study is the first to review such a trauma system. The aim was to examine the sensitivity of prehospital triage criteria [triage revised trauma score (T-RTS)] in identifying major trauma patients and to evaluate the current level of trauma care of a regionalized Dutch trauma system for major trauma patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Major trauma patients (n=511) (June 2001-December 2003) were selected from a regional trauma registry database. The prehospital T-RTS was computed and standardized W scores (Ws) were generated to compare observed vs expected survival based on contemporary US- and UK-norm databases.
RESULTS: The T-RTS showed low sensitivity for the prehospital identification of major trauma patients [34.1% (T-RTS< or =10)]. Nevertheless, 78.0% of all major trauma patients were directly managed by the trauma center. These patients were more severely injured than their counterparts at non-trauma-center hospitals (p<0.001). No significant difference emerged between the mortality rates of both groups. The Ws {-0.46 calculated on the US model [95% confidence interval (CI) ranging from -1.99 to 1.07]} [0.60 calculated on the UK model (95% CI ranging from -1.25 to 2.44)] did not differ significantly from zero.
CONCLUSION: The trauma center managed most of the major trauma patients in the trauma system but the triage criteria need to be reconsidered. The level of care of the regional trauma system was shown to measure up to US and UK benchmarks.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16699803     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-006-0057-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  20 in total

Review 1.  Is the revised trauma score still useful?

Authors:  Belinda J Gabbe; Peter A Cameron; Caroline F Finch
Journal:  ANZ J Surg       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 1.872

2.  Interpretation of the Ws statistic: application to an integrated trauma system.

Authors:  P A Younge; T J Coats; D Gurney; C J Kirk
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1997-09

3.  Evaluating performance of the Revised Trauma score as a triage instrument in the prehospital setting.

Authors:  J Roorda; E F van Beeck; J W Stapert; W ten Wolde
Journal:  Injury       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 2.586

4.  National inventory of hospital trauma centers.

Authors:  Ellen J MacKenzie; David B Hoyt; John C Sacra; Gregory J Jurkovich; Anthony R Carlini; Sandra D Teitelbaum; Harry Teter
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-03-26       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care.

Authors:  S P Baker; B O'Neill; W Haddon; W B Long
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1974-03

6.  Uses and abuses of statistical models for evaluating trauma care.

Authors:  J M Jones; A D Redmond; J Templeton
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1995-01

7.  Trauma systems. Current status--future challenges.

Authors:  J G West; M J Williams; D D Trunkey; C C Wolferth
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1988-06-24       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Development of trauma systems and effect on outcomes after injury.

Authors:  Avery B Nathens; Fabrice P Brunet; Ronald V Maier
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2004-05-29       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  The failure of prehospital trauma prediction rules to classify trauma patients accurately.

Authors:  W G Baxt; C C Berry; M D Epperson; V Scalzitti
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 5.721

10.  The hit and miss of ISS and TRISS. Yorkshire Trauma Audit Group.

Authors:  N Zoltie; F T de Dombal
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-10-09
View more
  6 in total

1.  Prehospital triage for mass casualty incidents using the META method for early surgical assessment: retrospective validation of a hospital trauma registry.

Authors:  Rodolfo Romero Pareja; Rafael Castro Delgado; Fernando Turégano Fuentes; Israel Jhon Thissard-Vasallo; David Sanz Rosa; Pedro Arcos González
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2018-11-07       Impact factor: 3.693

2.  Towards a national trauma registry for the United Arab Emirates.

Authors:  Sami Shaban; Hani O Eid; Ezedin Barka; Fikri M Abu-Zidan
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2010-07-10

3.  Prehospital identification of major trauma patients.

Authors:  Gürbey Ocak; Leontien M Sturms; Josephine M Hoogeveen; Saskia Le Cessie; Gerrolt N Jukema
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2008-06-26       Impact factor: 3.445

4.  History, development and future of trauma care for multiple injured patients in the Netherlands.

Authors:  K W W Lansink; L P H Leenen
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2012-09-13       Impact factor: 3.693

5.  Patients Referred to a Norwegian Trauma Centre: effect of transfer distance on injury patterns, use of resources and outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas Kristiansen; Hans M Lossius; Kjetil Søreide; Petter A Steen; Christine Gaarder; Pål A Næss
Journal:  J Trauma Manag Outcomes       Date:  2011-06-16

6.  Direct (presenting primarily to trauma center) versus indirect (referred or transferred) admission of patients to the Trauma Centre of King George Medical University: One-year prospective pilot study.

Authors:  Vikas Verma; Girish K Singh; Santosh Kumar; Vineet Sharma; Vijaysheel Gautam; Suresh Kumar
Journal:  Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.