M Helm1, A Bitzl, S Klinger, R Lefering, L Lampl, M Kulla. 1. Abteilung für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin - Sektion Notfallmedizin, Bundeswehrkrankenhaus Ulm, Oberer Eselsberg 40, 89070, Ulm, Deutschland. matthias.helm@extern.uni-ulm.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The trauma register of the German Society of Trauma Surgery (TraumaRegister DGU®/TR-DGU) has been proven to be a valuable tool for external assessment of quality in the treatment of patients with major trauma. This publication shows for the first time how the quality of trauma treatment in a level I trauma centre could be improved over a period of almost ten years with the help of continuous quality management, i.e. recognizing a problem, developing a solution and evaluating its effect. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Tracer parameters and indicators of quality are presented in four periods over a total study period from 1st January 1989 to 31st March 2007. The division into four periods is due to major changes in the trauma treatment algorithms or structural changes in the trauma room. The results are displayed for all patients treated in the trauma room and for those patients with an injury severity score (ISS)≥16. RESULTS: Over all four periods a total number of n=2,239 patients were admitted to the trauma room. Based on the results of the trauma register a number of changes were made, not only structural changes, such as the introduction of point-of-care diagnostics, initially conventional X-ray, then digital X-ray and finally multislice computed tomography (CT) scanning in the trauma room but also changes in the way personnel participating in the trauma treatment are trained. Advanced trauma life support (ATLS®) has become the standard training for doctors and prehospital trauma life support (PHTLS®) for nurses. Time efficient treatment algorithms were introduced. All measures led to changes in several parameters which are chosen as indicators for good treatment quality. It was for instance possible to reduce the average total trauma treatment time for patients with an ISS≥16 from initially 90.9±48.6 min to 37.4±18. min in the final study period. CONCLUSIONS: The external quality management performed by the TR-DGU has proved to be a constant source of inspiration. The effects of the changes made can be scientifically proven. It is to be discussed to what extent a sole external quality management can be useful.
BACKGROUND: The trauma register of the German Society of Trauma Surgery (TraumaRegister DGU®/TR-DGU) has been proven to be a valuable tool for external assessment of quality in the treatment of patients with major trauma. This publication shows for the first time how the quality of trauma treatment in a level I trauma centre could be improved over a period of almost ten years with the help of continuous quality management, i.e. recognizing a problem, developing a solution and evaluating its effect. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Tracer parameters and indicators of quality are presented in four periods over a total study period from 1st January 1989 to 31st March 2007. The division into four periods is due to major changes in the trauma treatment algorithms or structural changes in the trauma room. The results are displayed for all patients treated in the trauma room and for those patients with an injury severity score (ISS)≥16. RESULTS: Over all four periods a total number of n=2,239 patients were admitted to the trauma room. Based on the results of the trauma register a number of changes were made, not only structural changes, such as the introduction of point-of-care diagnostics, initially conventional X-ray, then digital X-ray and finally multislice computed tomography (CT) scanning in the trauma room but also changes in the way personnel participating in the trauma treatment are trained. Advanced trauma life support (ATLS®) has become the standard training for doctors and prehospital trauma life support (PHTLS®) for nurses. Time efficient treatment algorithms were introduced. All measures led to changes in several parameters which are chosen as indicators for good treatment quality. It was for instance possible to reduce the average total trauma treatment time for patients with an ISS≥16 from initially 90.9±48.6 min to 37.4±18. min in the final study period. CONCLUSIONS: The external quality management performed by the TR-DGU has proved to be a constant source of inspiration. The effects of the changes made can be scientifically proven. It is to be discussed to what extent a sole external quality management can be useful.
Authors: T Wurmb; P Frühwald; J Brederlau; B Steinhübel; M Frommer; H Kuhnigk; M Kredel; J Knüpffer; W Hopfner; J Maroske; R Moll; R Wagner; A Thiede; G Schindler; N Roewer Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Stefan Huber-Wagner; Rolf Lefering; Lars-Mikael Qvick; Markus Körner; Michael V Kay; Klaus-Jürgen Pfeifer; Maximilian Reiser; Wolf Mutschler; Karl-Georg Kanz Journal: Lancet Date: 2009-03-25 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Brian J Eastridge; Jose Salinas; John G McManus; Lorne Blackburn; Eileen M Bugler; William H Cooke; Victor A Convertino; Victor A Concertino; Charles E Wade; John B Holcomb Journal: J Trauma Date: 2007-08
Authors: Wolfgang Parsch; Markus Loibl; Uli Schmucker; Franz Hilber; Michael Nerlich; Antonio Ernstberger Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2014-10-31 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Christian B Frank; Christoph G Wölfl; Aidan Hogan; Arnold J Suda; Thorsten Gühring; Bernhard Gliwitzky; Matthias Münzberg Journal: J Trauma Manag Outcomes Date: 2014-07-07