Influence of a New Province-Wide Trauma System on Motor Vehicle Trauma Care and Mortality

ABSTRACT Objectives Trauma systems have been widely implemented across Canada, but access to trauma care remains a challenge for much of the population. This study aims to develop and validate a model to quantify the accessibility of definitive care within one provincial trauma system and identify populations with poor access to trauma care. Methods A geographic information system (GIS) was used to generate models of pre-scene and post-scene intervals, respectively. Models were validated using a population-based trauma registry containing data on prehospital time intervals and injury locations for Nova Scotia (NS). Validated models were then applied to describe the population-level accessibility of trauma care for the NS population as well as a cohort of patients injured in motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). Results Predicted post-scene intervals were found to be highly correlated with documented post-scene intervals (β 1.05, p<0.001). Using the model, it was found that 88.1% and 42.7% of the population had access to Level III and Level I trauma care within 60 minutes of prehospital time from their residence, respectively. Access for victims of MVCs was lower, with 84.3% and 29.7% of the cohort having access to Level III and Level I trauma care within 60 minutes of the location of injury, respectively. Conclusion GIS models can be used to identify populations with poor access to care and inform service planning in Canada. Although only 43% of the provincial population has access to Level I care within 60 minutes, the majority of the population of NS has access to Level III trauma care.

Download Full-text

MP47: Factors associated with preventable trauma death: a narrative review

CJEM ◽

10.1017/cem.2020.195 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 22 (S1) ◽

pp. S59-S60

Author(s):

G. Genois ◽

I. Vlahovic ◽

L. Moore ◽

B. Beck ◽

P. Blanchard ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Trauma Care ◽

Motor Vehicle ◽

Trauma System ◽

Narrative Review ◽

Expert Assessment ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Preventable Death ◽

Trauma Death ◽

Panel Review

Introduction: Trauma care is highly complex and prone to medical errors. Accordingly, several studies have identified adverse events and conditions leading to potentially preventable or preventable deaths. Depending on the availability of specialized trauma care and the trauma system organization, between 10 and 30% of trauma-related deaths worldwide could be preventable if optimal care was promptly delivered. This narrative review aims to identify the main determinants and areas for improvements associated with potentially preventable trauma mortality. Methods: A literature review was performed using Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1990 to a maximum of 6 months before submission for publication. Experimental or observational studies that have assessed determinants and areas for improvements that are associated with trauma death preventability were considered for inclusion. Two researchers independently selected eligible studies and extracted the relevant data. The main areas for improvements were classified using the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations patient event taxonomy. No statistical analyses were performed given the data heterogeneity. Results: From the 3647 individual titles obtained by the search strategy, a total of 37 studies were included. Each study included between 72 and 35311 trauma patients who had sustained mostly blunt trauma, frequently following a fall or a motor vehicle accident. Preventability assessment was performed for 17 to 2081 patients using either a single expert assessment (n = 2, 5,4%) or an expert panel review (n = 35, 94.6%). The definition of preventability and the taxonomy used varied greatly between the studies. The rate of potentially preventable or preventable death ranged from 2.4% to 76.5%. The most frequently reported areas for improvement were treatment delay, diagnosis accuracy to avoid missed or incorrect diagnosis and adverse events associated with the initial procedures performed. The risk of bias of the included studies was high for 32 studies because of the retrospective design and the panel review preventability assessment. Conclusion: Deaths occurring after a trauma remain often preventable. Included studies have used unstandardized definitions of a preventable death and various methodologies to perform the preventability assessment. The proportion of preventable or potentially preventable death reported in each study ranged from 2.4% to 76.5%. Delayed treatment, missed or incorrect initial diagnosis and adverse events following a procedure were commonly associated with preventable trauma deaths and could be targeted to develop quality improvement and monitoring projects.

Download Full-text

Saving Lives on the Battlefield: A Joint Trauma System Review of Pre-Hospital Trauma Care in Combined Joint Operating Area - Afghanistan (CJOA-A)

10.21236/ada573744 ◽

2013 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Russ S. Kotwal ◽

Frank K. Butler ◽

Erin P. Edgar ◽

Stacy A. Shackelford ◽

Donald R. Bennett ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Trauma Care ◽

Trauma System ◽

System Review ◽

Joint Trauma

Download Full-text

The evolution of trauma care in the Netherlands over 20 years

European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery ◽

10.1007/s00068-019-01273-4 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 46 (2) ◽

pp. 329-335 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Falco Hietbrink ◽

Roderick M. Houwert ◽

Karlijn J. P. van Wessem ◽

Rogier K. J. Simmermacher ◽

Geertje A. M. Govaert ◽

...

Keyword(s):

The Netherlands ◽

Trauma Care ◽

Trauma System ◽

Trauma Surgeon ◽

Severely Injured ◽

Severely Injured Patients ◽

The Past ◽

Level 1 ◽

Trauma Surgeons ◽

Injured Patients

Abstract Introduction In 1999 an inclusive trauma system was initiated in the Netherlands and a nationwide trauma registry, including all admitted trauma patients to every hospital, was started. The Dutch trauma system is run by trauma surgeons who treat both the truncal (visceral) and extremity injuries (fractures). Materials and Methods In this comprehensive review based on previous published studies, data over the past 20 years from the central region of the Netherlands (Utrecht) was evaluated. Results It is demonstrated that the initiation of the trauma systems and the governance by the trauma surgeons led to a region-wide mortality reduction of 50% and a mortality reduction for the most severely injured of 75% in the level 1 trauma centre. Furthermore, major improvements were found in terms of efficiency, demonstrating the quality of the current system and its constructs such as the type of surgeon. Due to the major reduction in mortality over the past few years, the emphasis of trauma care evaluation shifts towards functional outcome of severely injured patients. For the upcoming years, centralisation of severely injured patients should also aim at the balance between skills in primary resuscitation and surgical stabilization versus longitudinal surgical involvement. Conclusion Further centralisation to a limited number of level 1 trauma centres in the Netherlands is necessary to consolidate experience and knowledge for the trauma surgeon. The future trauma surgeon, as specialist for injured patients, should be able to provide the vast majority of trauma care in this system. For the remaining part, intramural, regional and national collaboration is essential

Download Full-text

The impact of regionalized trauma care on the distribution of severely injured patients in the Netherlands

European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery ◽

10.1007/s00068-021-01615-1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Suzan Dijkink ◽

Erik W. van Zwet ◽

Pieta Krijnen ◽

Luke P. H. Leenen ◽

Frank W. Bloemers ◽

...

Keyword(s):

The Netherlands ◽

Trauma Care ◽

Trauma System ◽

Future Research ◽

Severely Injured ◽

Trauma Centers ◽

Severely Injured Patients ◽

The Right ◽

Injured Patients ◽

The Impact

Abstract Background Twenty years ago, an inclusive trauma system was implemented in the Netherlands. The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of structured trauma care on the concentration of severely injured patients over time. Methods All severely injured patients (Injury Severity Score [ISS] ≥ 16) documented in the Dutch Trauma Registry (DTR) in the calendar period 2008–2018 were included for analysis. We compared severely injured patients, with and without severe neurotrauma, directly brought to trauma centers (TC) and non-trauma centers (NTC). The proportion of patients being directly transported to a trauma center was determined, as was the total Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS), and ISS. Results The documented number of severely injured patients increased from 2350 in 2008 to 4694 in 2018. During this period, on average, 70% of these patients were directly admitted to a TC (range 63–74%). Patients without severe neurotrauma had a lower chance of being brought to a TC compared to those with severe neurotrauma. Patients directly presented to a TC were more severely injured, reflected by a higher total AIS and ISS, than those directly transported to a NTC. Conclusion Since the introduction of a well-organized trauma system in the Netherlands, trauma care has become progressively centralized, with more severely injured patients being directly presented to a TC. However, still 30% of these patients is initially brought to a NTC. Future research should focus on improving pre-hospital triage to facilitate swift transfer of the right patient to the right hospital.

Download Full-text

Effectiveness of trauma care systems at different stages of development in reducing mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047439 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (6) ◽

pp. e047439

Author(s):

Rayan Jafnan Alharbi ◽

Virginia Lewis ◽

Sumina Shrestha ◽

Charne Miller

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Trauma Care ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Trauma System ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Trauma Centre ◽

Trauma Patients ◽

Trauma Systems ◽

Stages Of Development

IntroductionThe introduction of trauma systems that began in the 1970s resulted in improved trauma care and a decreased rate of morbidity and mortality of trauma patients. Worldwide, little is known about the effectiveness of trauma care system at different stages of development, from establishing a trauma centre, to implementing a trauma system and as trauma systems mature. The objective of this study is to extract and analyse data from research that evaluates mortality rates according to different stages of trauma system development globally.Methods and analysisThe proposed review will comply with the checklist of the ‘Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis’. In this review, only peer-reviewed articles written in English, human-related studies and published between January 2000 and December 2020 will be included. Articles will be retrieved from MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. Additional articles will be identified from other sources such as references of included articles and author lists. Two independent authors will assess the eligibility of studies as well as critically appraise and assess the methodological quality of all included studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias for Non-randomised Studies of Interventions tool. Two independent authors will extract the data to minimise errors and bias during the process of data extraction using an extraction tool developed by the authors. For analysis calculation, effect sizes will be expressed as risk ratios or ORs for dichotomous data or weighted (or standardised) mean differences and 95% CIs for continuous data in this systematic review.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will use secondary data only, therefore, research ethics approval is not required. The results from this study will be submitted to a peer-review journal for publication and we will present our findings at national and international conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019142842.

Download Full-text

Trauma Care at Rural Level III Trauma Centers in a State Trauma System

Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery ◽

10.1097/01.ta.0000197671.00818.76 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 62 (2) ◽

pp. 498-503 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Thomas S. Helling

Keyword(s):

Trauma Care ◽

Trauma System ◽

Trauma Centers

Download Full-text

An inventory of Canadian trauma systems: opportunities for improving access to trauma care

CJEM ◽

10.2310/8000.2013.131089 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 16 (03) ◽

pp. 207-213 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Christopher C.D. Evans ◽

J.M. Tallon ◽

Jennifer Bridge ◽

Avery B. Nathens

Keyword(s):

Trauma Care ◽

System Development ◽

Trauma System ◽

Mail Survey ◽

Trauma Systems ◽

Trauma Centres ◽

Improved Outcomes ◽

System Components ◽

Trauma Surgeons ◽

Future Work

ABSTRACT Objective: Despite evidence that patients suffering major traumatic injuries have improved outcomes when cared for within an organized system, the extent of trauma system development in Canada is limited. We sought to compile a detailed inventory of trauma systems in Canada as a first step toward identifying opportunities for improving access to trauma care. Methods: We distributed a nationwide online and mail survey to stakeholders intended to evaluate the extent of implementation of specific trauma system components. Targeted stakeholders included emergency physicians, trauma surgeons, trauma program medical directors and program managers, prehospital providers, and decision makers at the regional and provincial levels. A “snowball” approach was used to expand the sample base of the survey. Descriptive statistics were generated to quantify the nature and extent of trauma system development by region. Results: The overall response rate was 38.7%, and all levels of stakeholders and all provinces/territories were represented. All provinces were found to have designated trauma centres; however, only 60% were found to have been accredited within the past 10 years. Components present in 50% or fewer provinces included an inclusive trauma system model, interfacility transfer agreements, and a mechanism to track bed availability within the system. Conclusion: There is significant variability in the extent of trauma system development in Canada. Although all provinces have designated trauma centres, opportunities exist in many systems to implement additional components to improve the inclusiveness of care. In future work, we intend to quantify the strength of the relationship between different trauma system components and access to definitive trauma care.

Download Full-text