Suppr超能文献

创伤分诊的结果指标是否一致?

Do outcome measures for trauma triage agree?

作者信息

Leach Sydney R, Swor Robert A, Jackson Raymond E, Fringer Ryan C, Bonfiglio Antonio X

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan 48085, USA.

出版信息

Prehosp Emerg Care. 2008 Oct-Dec;12(4):467-9. doi: 10.1080/10903120802290836.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The goal of trauma triage is to match resources to the needs of seriously injured patients. The trauma triage literature has used a variety of outcome measures to assess appropriate trauma activation. The objective of this study was to determine the agreement between procedural and nonprocedural outcome measures in a population of seriously injured patients transported to a single trauma center.

METHODS

Study authors reviewed all "level 2" trauma activations (January 2002-December 2003) at an American College of Surgeons (ACS) Level 1 trauma center. "Level 2" trauma activations were based on modified ACS Committee on Trauma (COT) triage criteria. Outcomes were classified as nonprocedural (Injury Severity Score [ISS] > 15 and intensive care unit [ICU] admission) and procedural (nonorthopedic emergent surgery, emergency chest tube placement, emergency department intubation, emergency department transfusion, or emergent interventional radiology care).

RESULTS

Of 479 patients, five were transferred out of hospital. The remaining 474 were predominantly male (62%), with a mean age of 39.7 years. Their average ISS was 13.2. There were nine deaths. For all subjects, 144 (30%) were admitted to the ICU, 172 (36%) had an ISS > 15, 80 (17%) received an emergent procedure, and 46 (10%) went for emergent surgery. Kappas comparing agreement of ISS > 15 with emergent resuscitation and emergent surgery were 0.31 and 0.15, respectively. Kappas comparing ICU admission with emergent resuscitation and emergent surgery were 0.51 and 0.26, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We identify moderate to poor agreement between nonprocedural and procedural outcomes of trauma triage in this population.

摘要

目的

创伤分诊的目标是使资源与重伤患者的需求相匹配。创伤分诊文献采用了多种结果指标来评估适当的创伤启动。本研究的目的是确定在转运至单一创伤中心的重伤患者群体中,程序性和非程序性结果指标之间的一致性。

方法

研究作者回顾了美国外科医师学会(ACS)一级创伤中心所有“二级”创伤启动(2002年1月至2003年12月)。“二级”创伤启动基于修订后的ACS创伤委员会(COT)分诊标准。结果分为非程序性(损伤严重度评分[ISS]>15且入住重症监护病房[ICU])和程序性(非骨科急诊手术、急诊胸腔置管、急诊科插管、急诊科输血或急诊介入放射治疗)。

结果

479例患者中,5例转出医院。其余474例以男性为主(62%),平均年龄39.7岁。他们的平均ISS为13.2。有9例死亡。对于所有受试者,144例(30%)入住ICU,172例(36%)ISS>15,80例(17%)接受了急诊手术,46例(10%)接受了急诊手术。比较ISS>15与急诊复苏和急诊手术一致性的Kappa值分别为0.31和0.15。比较ICU入住与急诊复苏和急诊手术一致性的Kappa值分别为0.51和0.26。

结论

我们发现该人群中创伤分诊的非程序性和程序性结果之间的一致性为中度至较差。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验