R P Dumas1, M A Vella2, J S Hatchimonji3, L Ma4, Z Maher5, D N Holena6. 1. Division of General and Acute Care Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. Electronic address: ryan.dumas@utsouthwestern.edu. 2. Division of Acute Care Surgery and Trauma, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester NY, USA. Electronic address: michael_vella@urmc.rochester.edu. 3. Division of Traumatology, Surgical Critical Care and Emergency Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: Justin.Hatchimonji@uphs.upenn.edu. 4. Division of Traumatology, Surgical Critical Care and Emergency Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: lucywma@sas.upenn.edu. 5. Division of Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: zoe.maher@tuhs.temple.edu. 6. Division of Traumatology, Surgical Critical Care and Emergency Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: daniel.holena@uphs.upenn.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Trauma video review (TVR) for quality improvement and education in the United States has been described for nearly three decades. The most recent information on this practice indicated a declining prevalence. We hypothesized that TVR utilization has increased since most recent estimates. METHODS: We conducted a survey of TVR practices at level I and level II US trauma centers. We distributed an electronic survey covering past, current, and future TVR utilization to the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma membership. RESULTS: 45.0% of US level I and level II trauma centers completed surveys. 71/249 centers (28.5%) had active TVR programs. The use of TVR did not differ between level I and level II centers (28.8% vs. 27.8%, p = 0.87). Respondents using TVR were overwhelmingly positive about its perception (median score 8, [IQR 6-9]; 10 = 'best') at their institutions. CONCLUSIONS: TVR use at Level I centers has increased over the past decade. Increased TVR utilization may form the basis for multicenter studies comparing processes of care during trauma resuscitation.
INTRODUCTION:Trauma video review (TVR) for quality improvement and education in the United States has been described for nearly three decades. The most recent information on this practice indicated a declining prevalence. We hypothesized that TVR utilization has increased since most recent estimates. METHODS: We conducted a survey of TVR practices at level I and level II US trauma centers. We distributed an electronic survey covering past, current, and future TVR utilization to the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma membership. RESULTS: 45.0% of US level I and level II trauma centers completed surveys. 71/249 centers (28.5%) had active TVR programs. The use of TVR did not differ between level I and level II centers (28.8% vs. 27.8%, p = 0.87). Respondents using TVR were overwhelmingly positive about its perception (median score 8, [IQR 6-9]; 10 = 'best') at their institutions. CONCLUSIONS:TVR use at Level I centers has increased over the past decade. Increased TVR utilization may form the basis for multicenter studies comparing processes of care during trauma resuscitation.
Authors: Timmy Li; Daniel Jafari; Cristy Meyer; Ashley Voroba; Ghania Haddad; Samuel Abecassis; Matthew Bank; Akiva Dym; Ali Naqvi; Rashmeet Gujral; Daniel Rolston Journal: J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open Date: 2021-01-22
Authors: Avneesh Bhangu; Lowyl Notario; Ruxandra L Pinto; Dylan Pannell; Will Thomas-Boaz; Corey Freedman; Homer Tien; Avery B Nathens; Luis da Luz Journal: CJEM Date: 2022-04-12 Impact factor: 2.929
Authors: Veerle Heesters; Ruben Witlox; Henriette A van Zanten; Sophie J Jansen; Remco Visser; Veerle Heijstek; Arjan B Te Pas Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2022-08-04 Impact factor: 3.569