首页> 外文期刊>The journal of trauma and acute care surgery >Institutional and provider factors impeding access to trauma center care: An analysis of transfer practices in a regional trauma system
【24h】

Institutional and provider factors impeding access to trauma center care: An analysis of transfer practices in a regional trauma system

机译:阻碍获得创伤中心护理的机构和提供者因素:区域创伤系统中的转移实践分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: More than a third of patients with severe injury who receive initial care at nontrauma centers (NTCs) are not transferred to trauma center care. In those who are transferred, significant delays have been described. The availability of specialists, imaging modalities, or critical care resources might significantly affect transfer practices. METHODS: We undertook a population-based retrospective cohort study of adult patients with severe injury who were transported from the scene to an NTC. NTCs were characterized based on the availability of general and orthopedic surgeons, computed tomographic scanners, intensive care units, and emergency department staffing. NTCs that had all of the resources were characterized as resource rich, while those with none were characterized as resource limited. We evaluated the relationships between NTC resources and the likelihood and timeliness of interfacility transfer through the use of hierarchical regression modeling. RESULTS: We identified 15,906 patients with severe injury across 192 NTCs (22% were resource limited, 57% were resource intermediate, and 21% were resource rich). Patients at resource rich centers, as compared with those at resource limited centers, were less likely to be transferred (27% vs. 50%, p < 0.001). This association persisted after adjustment for confounders (odds ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.92). Among patients who were transferred, median emergency department length of stay (ED-LOS) was 3.5 hours (interquartile range, 1.7-4.6 hours). However, ED-LOS varied significantly because resource rich centers had a greater proportion of patients experiencing prolonged ED-LOS when compared with resource limited centers (31% vs. 15%, p < 0.001). This association also persisted on multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 2.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-3.43). CONCLUSION: Severely injured patients who received initial care in resource rich NTCs were less likely to be transferred to a trauma center compared with resource limited NTCs. Significant delays in the transfer process were identified. However, patients transferred from resource rich centers were more likely to experience prolonged ED-LOS compared with resource limited NTCs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic study, level II.
机译:背景:在非创伤中心(NTC)接受初始护理的严重受伤患者中,超过三分之一的人没有转移至创伤中心护理。在那些被转移的人中,已经描述了严重的延误。专家,影像方式或重症监护资源的可用性可能会严重影响转诊实践。方法:我们进行了一项以人群为基础的回顾性队列研究,研究对象是从现场转移到NTC的重伤成人患者。 NTC的特征是根据普通和整形外科医生,计算机断层扫描仪,重症监护病房和急诊人员的配备情况确定的。具有所有资源的NTC的特征是资源丰富,而没有资源的NTC的特征是资源有限。我们通过使用层次回归模型评估了NTC资源与机构间转移的可能性和及时性之间的关系。结果:我们在192个NTC中确定了15906名重伤患者(22%的资源有限,57%的资源处于中间,21%的资源丰富)。与资源有限中心的患者相比,资源丰富中心的患者转移的可能性较小(27%比50%,p <0.001)。调整混杂因素后,这种关联仍然存在(优势比,0.66; 95%置信区间,0.47-0.92)。在被转移的患者中,急诊科的中位住院时间(ED-LOS)为3.5小时(四分位间距为1.7-4.6小时)。然而,ED-LOS差异很大,因为与资源有限的中心相比,资源丰富的中心有更长的ED-LOS患者比例(31%比15%,p <0.001)。这种关联也持续存在于多变量分析中(优势比为2.02; 95%置信区间为1.19-3.43)。结论:与资源有限的NTC相比,在资源丰富的NTC中接受过初始护理的重伤患者转移到创伤中心的可能性较小。确认了转移过程中的重大延迟。但是,与资源有限的NTC相比,从资源丰富的中心转移的患者更有可能经历长时间的ED-LOS。证据级别:流行病学研究,II级。

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