Elaine Cole1, Fiona Lecky, Anita West, Neil Smith, Karim Brohi, Ross Davenport. 1. *Centre for Trauma Sciences, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK†Emergency Medicine Research, University of Sheffield, London, UK‡Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, UK§NCEPOD (National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death), London, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of the implementation of an inclusive pan-regional trauma system on quality of care. BACKGROUND: Inclusive trauma systems ensure access to quality injury care for a designated population. The 2007 National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (NCEPOD) found quality deficits for 60% of severely injured patients. In 2010, London implemented an inclusive trauma system. This represented an opportunity to evaluate the impact of a pan-regional trauma system on quality of care. METHODS: Evaluation of the London Trauma System (ELoTS) utilized the NCEPOD study core methodology. Severely injured patients were identified prospectively over a 3-month period. Data were collected from prehospital care to 72 h following admission or death. Quality, processes of care, and outcome were assessed by expert review using NCEPOD criteria. RESULTS: Three hundred and twenty one severely injured patients were included of which 84% were taken directly to a major trauma center, in contrast to 16% in NCEPOD. Overall quality improved with the proportion of patients receiving "good overall care" increasing significantly [NCEPOD: 48% vs ALL-ELoTS: 69%, RR 1.3 (1.2 to 1.4), P < 0.01], primarily through improvements in organizational processes rather than clinical care. Improved quality was associated with increased early survival, with the greatest benefit for critically injured patients [NCEPOD: 31% vs All-ELoTS 11%, RR 0.37 (0.33 to 0.99), P = 0.04]. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusive trauma systems deliver quality and process improvements, primarily through organizational change. Most improvements were seen in major trauma centers; however, systems implementation did not automatically lead to a reduction in clinical deficits in care.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of the implementation of an inclusive pan-regional trauma system on quality of care. BACKGROUND: Inclusive trauma systems ensure access to quality injury care for a designated population. The 2007 National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (NCEPOD) found quality deficits for 60% of severely injured patients. In 2010, London implemented an inclusive trauma system. This represented an opportunity to evaluate the impact of a pan-regional trauma system on quality of care. METHODS: Evaluation of the London Trauma System (ELoTS) utilized the NCEPOD study core methodology. Severely injured patients were identified prospectively over a 3-month period. Data were collected from prehospital care to 72 h following admission or death. Quality, processes of care, and outcome were assessed by expert review using NCEPOD criteria. RESULTS: Three hundred and twenty one severely injured patients were included of which 84% were taken directly to a major trauma center, in contrast to 16% in NCEPOD. Overall quality improved with the proportion of patients receiving "good overall care" increasing significantly [NCEPOD: 48% vs ALL-ELoTS: 69%, RR 1.3 (1.2 to 1.4), P < 0.01], primarily through improvements in organizational processes rather than clinical care. Improved quality was associated with increased early survival, with the greatest benefit for critically injured patients [NCEPOD: 31% vs All-ELoTS 11%, RR 0.37 (0.33 to 0.99), P = 0.04]. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusive trauma systems deliver quality and process improvements, primarily through organizational change. Most improvements were seen in major trauma centers; however, systems implementation did not automatically lead to a reduction in clinical deficits in care.
Authors: Roos Johanna Maria Havermans; Felix Johannes Clouth; Koen Willem Wouter Lansink; Jeroen Kornelis Vermunt; Mariska Adriana Cornelia de Jongh; Leonie de Munter Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 3.693
Authors: Falco Hietbrink; Shahin Mohseni; Diego Mariani; Päl Aksel Naess; Cristina Rey-Valcárcel; Alan Biloslavo; Gary A Bass; Susan I Brundage; Henrique Alexandrino; Ruben Peralta; Luke P H Leenen; Tina Gaarder Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2022-07-07 Impact factor: 2.374
Authors: John Whitaker; Nollaig O'Donohoe; Max Denning; Dan Poenaru; Elena Guadagno; Andrew J M Leather; Justine I Davies Journal: BMJ Glob Health Date: 2021-05
Authors: Kate Curtis; Rebecca Mitchell; Amy McCarthy; Kellie Wilson; Connie Van; Belinda Kennedy; Gary Tall; Andrew Holland; Kim Foster; Stuart Dickinson; Henry T Stelfox Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2017-02-28 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Edward Baker; Ceri Battle; Abhishek Banjeri; Edward Carlton; Christine Dixon; Jennifer Ferry; Philip Hopkins; Robert Jones; Trevor Murrells; Christine Norton; Lee Patient; Ashraf Rasheed; Imogen Skene; Andrew Tabner; Malcolm Tunnicliff; Louise Young; Andreas Xyrichis; Gerry Lee Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 2.692