Department of Critical Care Medicine, Medicine and Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Crit Care Med. 2010 Apr;38(4):1187-96. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181d455fe.
Trauma care provides injured children with life- and limb-saving treatment, but it is unclear if the proper tools have been developed to measure the quality of care delivered. We sought to systematically review the literature on quality indicators for evaluating pediatric trauma care.
We searched MEDLINE (1950- January 14, 2009), EMBASE (1980-week 2, 2009), CINAHL (1982- week 2, 2009) and The Cochrane Library (4th Quarter 2008) from the earliest available date to January 14, 2009, plus the Gray Literature, select journals by hand, reference lists, and articles recommended by experts in the field. Studies were selected that used one or more quality indicators to evaluate the quality of care delivered to patients 18 yrs of age or younger with a major traumatic injury.
The literature search identified 6869 citations. Review of abstracts led to the retrieval of 538 full-text articles for assessment; 12 articles were selected for review. Of these, five (42%) articles were case series and five (42%) articles were cohort studies. Two articles included control groups, a before-and-after case series, and a nonrandomized controlled trial. A total of 120 quality indicators in pediatric trauma care were identified, predominantly measures of prehospital and hospital processes and outcomes of care. We did not identify any prehospital structure or posthospital or secondary injury prevention quality indicators. Among multiple trauma patients, deficiencies in the quality of care ranged from 8% to 45% of patients, with 6% to 32% of deaths in hospital judged to be preventable on peer review.
There is limited experimental research regarding quality indicators in pediatric trauma care, but the literature suggests that deficiencies exist in the quality of care. Future research is needed to develop and evaluate patient-centered pediatric-specific indicators that cover the full spectrum of trauma care.
创伤护理为受伤儿童提供了挽救生命和肢体的治疗,但目前尚不清楚是否已经开发出适当的工具来衡量所提供的护理质量。我们旨在系统地回顾评估儿科创伤护理质量的指标文献。
我们检索了 MEDLINE(1950 年-2009 年 1 月 14 日)、EMBASE(1980 年-第 2 周,2009 年)、CINAHL(1982 年-第 2 周,2009 年)和 The Cochrane Library(2008 年第 4 季度),检索时间从最早可获得日期到 2009 年 1 月 14 日,此外还检索了灰色文献、手工选择的期刊、参考文献列表和该领域专家推荐的文章。我们选择了使用一个或多个质量指标来评估对 18 岁或 18 岁以下患有严重创伤性损伤的患者提供的护理质量的研究。
文献检索共确定了 6869 条引文。对摘要的审查导致检索了 538 篇全文文章进行评估;有 12 篇文章入选进行综述。其中,5 篇(42%)为病例系列,5 篇(42%)为队列研究。有 2 篇文章包括对照组、前后病例系列和非随机对照试验。共确定了 120 个儿科创伤护理质量指标,主要是院前和医院处理过程和护理结果的指标。我们没有发现任何院前结构或医院后或二次损伤预防质量指标。在多发伤患者中,护理质量缺陷的范围为 8%至 45%的患者,有 6%至 32%的院内死亡经同行评议认为是可以预防的。
儿科创伤护理质量指标的实验研究有限,但文献表明护理质量存在缺陷。需要进一步研究开发和评估以患者为中心的、专门针对儿科的指标,涵盖创伤护理的整个范围。