INTRODUCTION: Temporary abdominal closure (TAC) is included in most published damage control (DC) and abdominal compartment (ACS) protocols. TAC is associated with a range of complications and the optimal method remains to be defined. The aim of the present study was to describe the experience regarding TAC after trauma and ACS in all acute care hospitals in a sparsely populated country with long transportation distances. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all 50 Norwegian hospitals with acute care general surgical services. RESULTS: The response rate was 88%. A very limited number of hospitals had treated more than one trauma patient with TAC (5%) or one patient with ACS (14%) on average per year. Most hospitals preferred vacuum assisted techniques, but few reported having formal protocols for TAC or ACS. Although most hospitals would refer patients with TAC to a trauma centre, more than 50% reported that they would perform a secondary reconstruction procedure themselves. CONCLUSION: This study shows that most Norwegian hospitals have limited experience with TAC and ACS. However, the long distances between hospitals mandate all acute care hospitals to implement formal treatment protocols including monitoring of IAP, diagnosing and decompression of ACS, and the use of TAC. Assuming experience leads to better care, the subsequent treatment of these patients might benefit from centralization to one or a few regional centers.
INTRODUCTION: Temporary abdominal closure (TAC) is included in most published damage control (DC) and abdominal compartment (ACS) protocols. TAC is associated with a range of complications and the optimal method remains to be defined. The aim of the present study was to describe the experience regarding TAC after trauma and ACS in all acute care hospitals in a sparsely populated country with long transportation distances. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all 50 Norwegian hospitals with acute care general surgical services. RESULTS: The response rate was 88%. A very limited number of hospitals had treated more than one traumapatient with TAC (5%) or one patient with ACS (14%) on average per year. Most hospitals preferred vacuum assisted techniques, but few reported having formal protocols for TAC or ACS. Although most hospitals would refer patients with TAC to a trauma centre, more than 50% reported that they would perform a secondary reconstruction procedure themselves. CONCLUSION: This study shows that most Norwegian hospitals have limited experience with TAC and ACS. However, the long distances between hospitals mandate all acute care hospitals to implement formal treatment protocols including monitoring of IAP, diagnosing and decompression of ACS, and the use of TAC. Assuming experience leads to better care, the subsequent treatment of these patients might benefit from centralization to one or a few regional centers.
Authors: Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Kevin B Laupland; Shahzeer Karmali; Eric Bergeron; T Charyk Stewart; Christie Findlay; N Parry; Suneel Khetarpal; D Evans Journal: J Trauma Date: 2006-02