首页> 外文期刊>Bulletin of Emergency and Trauma >Experience and Availability of Pelvic Binders at Swedish Trauma Units; A Nationwide Survey
【24h】

Experience and Availability of Pelvic Binders at Swedish Trauma Units; A Nationwide Survey

机译:瑞典创伤部队骨盆粘合剂的经验和可用性;全国调查

获取原文
           

摘要

Objective: To assess availability, experience, and knowledge about the Pelvic Circumferential Compression Device (PCCD) in Sweden.Methods: A telephone interview with the current on-call trauma doctors at all trauma units in Sweden was conducted. After a short presentation and oral consent, the doctors were asked to answer four short questions. We asked the doctors to answer whether they knew if they had PCCDs available in their emergency room, how many times had they applied a PCCD, which is the correct level of application for a PCCD, and if a PCCD can stop arterial bleeding.Results: The on-call trauma doctors at the nine University hospitals, twenty-two General hospitals and twenty-one District General hospitals, with response rate of 100%, were interviewed. Availability of PCCD was 85 % and there was no difference between hospital types (p=0.546). In all hospitals 29/52 (56%) of those interviewed had used a PCCD at least once. There were significantly more doctors that had used a PCCD at least once in the University hospitals (8/9), compared to General hospitals (13/22) and District General hospitals (8/21) (p=0.034). A total of 43/52 (83 %) doctors defined the greater trochanters as the correct level of application for a PCCD. No difference was found when comparing hospitals (p=0.208). Only 22/52 (42 %) of doctors answered that a PCCD could not stop an arterial bleeding. No difference was found between hospitals (p=0.665)Conclusion: Less than half of the doctors knew that a PCCD cannot stop arterial bleeding, while the majority knew the correct level of application of a PCCD.
机译:目的:评估瑞典关于骨盆周向压迫装置(PCCD)的可用性,经验和知识。方法:对瑞典所有创伤科的现时待命创伤医生进行电话采访。经过简短的陈述和口头同意后,要求医生回答四个简短的问题。我们要求医生回答他们是否知道在急诊室是否有PCCD,是否已经应用PCCD几次,这是PCCD的正确应用水平以及PCCD是否可以阻止动脉出血。对9所大学医院,22所综合医院和21所地区综合医院的待命创伤医生进行了访谈,答复率为100%。 PCCD的可用性为85%,两种类型的医院之间没有差异(p = 0.546)。在所有医院中,有29/52(56%)的受访者至少使用过一次PCCD。与综合医院(13/22)和地区综合医院(8/21)相比,大学医院(8/9)至少一次使用PCCD的医生多得多(p = 0.034)。共有43/52(83%)位医生将大转子定义为PCCD的正确应用水平。比较医院时未发现差异(p = 0.208)。只有22/52(42%)的医生回答说PCCD无法停止动脉出血。结论:不到一半的医生知道PCCD不能停止动脉出血,而大多数医生知道PCCD的正确应用水平,这在医院之间没有发现差异(p = 0.665)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号