Literature DB >> 18425547

Key performance indicators in British military trauma.

Adam Stannard1, Nigel R Tai, Douglas M Bowley, Mark Midwinter, Tim J Hodgetts.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Key performance indicators (KPI) are tools for assessing process and outcome in systems of health care provision and are an essential component in performance improvement. Although KPI have been used in British military trauma for 10 years, they remain poorly defined and are derived from civilian metrics that do not adjust for the realities of field trauma care. Our aim was to modify current trauma KPI to ensure they more faithfully reflect both the military setting and contemporary evidence in order to both aid accurate calibration of the performance of the British Defence Medical Services and act as a driver for performance improvement.
METHOD: A workshop was convened that was attended by senior, experienced doctors and nurses from all disciplines of trauma care in the British military. "Speciality-specific" KPI were developed by interest groups using evidence-based data where available and collective experience where this was lacking. In a final discussion these were streamlined into 60 KPI covering each phase of trauma management.
CONCLUSION: The introduction of these KPI sets a number of important benchmarks by which British military trauma can be measured. As part of a performance improvement programme, these will allow closer monitoring of our performance and assist efforts to develop, train, and resource British military trauma providers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18425547     DOI: 10.1007/s00268-008-9583-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  14 in total

1.  Study on performance following Key Performance Indicators for trauma care: Khon Kaen Hospital 2000.

Authors:  Witaya Chadbunchachai; Surachai Saranrittichai; Sununta Sriwiwat; Jirawadee Chumsri; Sirikul Kulleab; Piyaporn Jaikwang
Journal:  J Med Assoc Thai       Date:  2003-01

2.  The neglect of trauma surgery.

Authors:  Nigel R M Tai; James M Ryan; Adam J Brooks
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-04-08

3.  Is delayed laparotomy for blunt abdominal trauma a valid quality improvement measure in the era of nonoperative management of abdominal injuries?

Authors:  Victor J Sorensen; Judy N Mikhail; Riyad C Karmy-Jones
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2002-03

Review 4.  A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing outcome of severely injured patients treated in trauma centers following the establishment of trauma systems.

Authors:  Brian Celso; Joseph Tepas; Barbara Langland-Orban; Etienne Pracht; Linda Papa; Lawrence Lottenberg; Lewis Flint
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2006-02

5.  Integration of concurrent trauma registry and performance improvement programs.

Authors:  M K FitzPatrick; H L Frankel; J McMaster; L A Heliger; S Auerbach; P Reilly; C W Schwab
Journal:  J Trauma Nurs       Date:  2000 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 1.010

6.  Trauma registry data validation: Essential for quality trauma care.

Authors:  Thein Hlaing; Lisa Hollister; Mary Aaland
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2006-12

Review 7.  Trauma systems.

Authors:  David B Hoyt; Raul Coimbra
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 2.741

8.  Continuous use of standard process audit filters has limited value in an established trauma system.

Authors:  H G Cryer; J R Hiatt; A W Fleming; J P Gruen; J Sterling
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1996-09

9.  American College of Surgeons audit filters: associations with patient outcome and resource utilization.

Authors:  W S Copes; C F Staz; C W Konvolinka; W J Sacco
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1995-03

10.  The identification of criteria to evaluate prehospital trauma care using the Delphi technique.

Authors:  Matthew R Rosengart; Avery B Nathens; Melissa A Schiff
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2007-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.