McDonald Eileen M, MacKenzie Ellen J, Teitelbaum Sandra D, Carlini Anthony R, Teter Harry, Valenziano Carl P
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Injury Research and Policy, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Injury. 2007 May;38(5):538-47. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2006.11.020. Epub 2007 Feb 20.
Despite the requirement for and endorsement of injury prevention efforts among U.S. trauma centres, little is known about the breadth and depth of their current activities.
A survey was sent to eligible institutions in the National Inventory of Trauma Centres to better describe how level I and II centres are fulfilling their injury prevention requirement, to identify the barriers to conducting prevention activities, and to determine trauma centre personnel's interest in enhancing their prevention role.
A total of 268 trauma centres (60%) completed the survey. Only 19% reported having an injury prevention director/coordinator but more than half of centres reported participating in 9 of 11 injury prevention activities, including participating in community events (97%), sending speakers to local schools (89%), and preparing or distributing educational materials (84%). Lack of time (68%), dedicated funding (68%), and an injury prevention specialist (45%) were the most frequently cited barriers to conducting injury prevention activities. Injury prevention collaborations were reported with safety groups (24%) and with emergency medical services, fire and police (23%). Trauma centres partnered less frequently with academic institutions (11%) and local or state health departments (16%). Topics and formats for injury prevention training as well as training barriers were also explored.
Improved partnerships and linkages with established agencies and organisations at the local and state levels could assist trauma centres in leveraging their more limited resources and expertise to offer state-of-the-art injury prevention programs and policies. As low- and middle-income countries are developing or strengthening their trauma systems, they should be encouraged to view injury prevention as a fundamental responsibility.
尽管美国创伤中心需要并认可预防伤害的工作，但对于其当前活动的广度和深度知之甚少。
向创伤中心国家清单中的合格机构发送了一项调查，以更好地描述一级和二级中心如何履行其预防伤害的要求，确定开展预防活动的障碍，并确定创伤中心工作人员对加强其预防作用的兴趣。
共有268家创伤中心（60%）完成了调查。只有19%的中心报告有预防伤害主任/协调员，但超过一半的中心报告参与了11项预防伤害活动中的9项，包括参加社区活动（97%）、派演讲者到当地学校（89%）以及编写或分发教育材料（84%）。时间不足（68%）、专项资金（68%）和预防伤害专家（45%）是开展预防伤害活动最常被提及的障碍。据报告，与安全组织（24%）以及紧急医疗服务、消防和警察部门（23%）开展了预防伤害合作。创伤中心与学术机构（11%）和地方或州卫生部门（16%）的合作较少。还探讨了预防伤害培训的主题和形式以及培训障碍。
改善与地方和州一级现有机构和组织的伙伴关系和联系，可以帮助创伤中心利用其更有限的资源和专业知识，提供最先进的预防伤害计划和政策。在低收入和中等收入国家发展或加强其创伤系统时，应鼓励它们将预防伤害视为一项基本责任。
