Arbabi Saman, Jurkovich Gregory J, Rivara Frederick P, Nathens Avery B, Moore Maria, Demarest Gerald B, Maier Ronald V
Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Arch Surg. 2003 Jan;138(1):47-51; discussion 51. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.138.1.47.
There are very few data on characteristics or policies that improve patient outcomes in academic medical institutions. We were interested in 2 such policies or characteristics that are commonly implemented in academic centers: an in-house on-call attending physician policy and the existence of postgraduate medical education.
An in-house attending surgeon on-call policy and the presence of trauma and critical care fellowship programs improve outcomes of critically injured patients.
Multicenter cohort study. Two cohorts were analyzed: blunt trauma (n = 601; mortality, 16.0%) and penetrating abdominal trauma (n = 503; mortality, 7.5%).
Thirty-one academic level I trauma centers, 10 (32.3%) with in-house on-call policy and 11 (35.5%) with fellowship programs.
Mortality, hospital length of stay, and intensive care unit length of stay.
In-house on-call surgeon policy had no impact on mortality or length of hospital or intensive care unit stay for either the blunt or penetrating trauma cohort. However, the presence of fellowship programs was associated with a significant decrease in blunt trauma mortality (odds ratio, 0.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-0.8) and a decrease in length of intensive care unit stay (mean difference, 4.7 days; 95% CI, 0.6-8.8 days) and hospital stay (mean difference, 3.2 days; 95% CI, 0.6-5.9 days). There were no significant effects of fellowship programs on penetrating trauma outcomes.
An in-house on-call attending surgeon policy is not associated with improved outcomes. In contrast, presence of a trauma and surgical critical care fellowship program, a potential surrogate marker for an institution that is committed to this specialty interest, is associated with improved outcomes for critically injured patients. An investment in advanced postgraduate medical education has potential benefits in patient care and outcomes.
关于学术性医疗机构中改善患者治疗效果的特征或政策的数据非常少。我们关注学术中心通常实施的两项此类政策或特征:内部值班主治医师政策以及研究生医学教育的存在。
内部值班外科医生政策以及创伤与重症监护 fellowship 项目的存在可改善重伤患者的治疗效果。
多中心队列研究。分析了两个队列:钝性创伤(n = 601;死亡率 16.0%)和穿透性腹部创伤(n = 503;死亡率 7.5%)。
31 个一级学术创伤中心,10 个(32.3%)有内部值班政策,11 个(35.5%)有 fellowship 项目。
死亡率、住院时间和重症监护病房住院时间。
内部值班外科医生政策对钝性或穿透性创伤队列的死亡率、住院时间或重症监护病房住院时间均无影响。然而,fellowship 项目的存在与钝性创伤死亡率显著降低相关(比值比,0.4;95%置信区间[CI],0.1 - 0.8),以及重症监护病房住院时间缩短(平均差值,4.7 天;95%CI,0.6 - 8.8 天)和住院时间缩短(平均差值,3.2 天;95%CI,0.6 - 5.9 天)。fellowship 项目对穿透性创伤治疗效果无显著影响。
内部值班主治医师政策与改善治疗效果无关。相比之下,创伤与外科重症监护 fellowship 项目的存在,这是致力于该专业领域的机构的一个潜在替代指标,与重伤患者治疗效果改善相关。对高级研究生医学教育的投入在患者护理和治疗效果方面具有潜在益处。