A P Pearce1,2, Mer Marsden2,3, N Newell4, K Hancorn1, F Lecky5, K Brohi1,3, N Tai1,2,3. 1. Department of General Surgery, Royal London Hospital, Barts' Health NHS Trust, London, UK. 2. Academic Department of Military Surgery and Trauma, Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, Birmingham, UK. 3. Centre for Trauma Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, UK. 4. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College, London, UK. 5. Trauma and Audit Research Network, University of Manchester, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The temporal patterns and unit-based distributions of trauma patients requiring surgical intervention are poorly described in the UK. We describe the distribution of trauma patients in the UK and assess whether changes in working patterns could provide greater exposure for operative trauma training. METHODS: We searched the Trauma Audit and Research Network database to identify all patients between 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2016. Operative cases were defined as all patients who underwent laparotomy, thoracotomy or open vascular intervention. We assessed time of arrival, correlations between mechanism of injury and surgery, and the effect of changing shift patterns on exposure to trauma patients by reference to a standard 10-hour shift assuming a dedicated trauma rotation or fellowship. RESULTS: There were 159,719 patients from 194 hospitals submitted to the Network between 2014 and 2016. The busiest 20 centres accounted for 57,568 (36.0%) of cases in total. Of these 2147/57,568 patients (3.7%) required a general surgical operation; 43% of penetrating admissions (925 cases) and 2.2% of blunt admissions (1222 cases). The number of operations correlated more closely with the number of penetrating rather than blunt admissions (r = 0.89 vs r = 0.51). A diurnal pattern in trauma admissions enabled significant increases in trauma exposure with later start times. CONCLUSIONS: Centres with high volume and high penetrating rates are likely to require more general surgical input and should be identified as locations for operative trauma training. It is possible to improve the number of trauma patients seen in a shift by optimising shift start time.
INTRODUCTION: The temporal patterns and unit-based distributions of traumapatients requiring surgical intervention are poorly described in the UK. We describe the distribution of traumapatients in the UK and assess whether changes in working patterns could provide greater exposure for operative trauma training. METHODS: We searched the Trauma Audit and Research Network database to identify all patients between 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2016. Operative cases were defined as all patients who underwent laparotomy, thoracotomy or open vascular intervention. We assessed time of arrival, correlations between mechanism of injury and surgery, and the effect of changing shift patterns on exposure to traumapatients by reference to a standard 10-hour shift assuming a dedicated trauma rotation or fellowship. RESULTS: There were 159,719 patients from 194 hospitals submitted to the Network between 2014 and 2016. The busiest 20 centres accounted for 57,568 (36.0%) of cases in total. Of these 2147/57,568 patients (3.7%) required a general surgical operation; 43% of penetrating admissions (925 cases) and 2.2% of blunt admissions (1222 cases). The number of operations correlated more closely with the number of penetrating rather than blunt admissions (r = 0.89 vs r = 0.51). A diurnal pattern in trauma admissions enabled significant increases in trauma exposure with later start times. CONCLUSIONS: Centres with high volume and high penetrating rates are likely to require more general surgical input and should be identified as locations for operative trauma training. It is possible to improve the number of traumapatients seen in a shift by optimising shift start time.
Entities:
Keywords:
General surgery; Trauma centres; Trauma units
Authors: Märit Halmin; Flaminia Chiesa; Senthil K Vasan; Agneta Wikman; Rut Norda; Klaus Rostgaard; Ole Birger Vesterager Pedersen; Christian Erikstrup; Kaspar René Nielsen; Kjell Titlestad; Henrik Ullum; Henrik Hjalgrim; Gustaf Edgren Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Brendan G Carr; Peter Jenkins; Charles C Branas; Douglas J Wiebe; Patrick Kim; Charles W Schwab; Patrick M Reilly Journal: J Trauma Date: 2010-11
Authors: R A Davenport; N Tai; A West; O Bouamra; C Aylwin; M Woodford; A McGinley; F Lecky; M S Walsh; K Brohi Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 6.939