• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

外科医生响应时间要求的改变对俄亥俄州三级创伤中心治疗结果的影响:一切都关乎投入。

The effect of a change in the surgeon response time mandate on outcomes within Ohio level III trauma centers: it is all about commitment.

作者信息

Ingraham Angela, Shukla Rakesh, Riebe Jane, Knudson M Margaret, Johannigman Jay

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45267-0558, USA.

出版信息

J Trauma. 2010 May;68(5):1038-43. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181d486e9.

DOI:10.1097/TA.0b013e3181d486e9
PMID:20453758
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma guidelines for trauma center verification stipulate that the responsible surgeon be present within 15 minutes of the arrival of a critically injured patient. Recently, these guidelines were liberalized, extending the response time to 30 minutes in level III trauma centers. This study evaluated the potential impact of this guideline change on the delivery of care at Ohio's level III trauma centers. We hypothesized that there would be no measurable difference in the emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS), ED disposition, and facility mortality after enactment of this mandate, which extended the surgeon response time from 15 minutes to 30 minutes at level III trauma centers.

METHODS

Data were collected from the trauma registries of 13 level III trauma centers in Ohio beginning 2 years before and ending 2 years after June 30, 2004, the day the response time was extended to 30 minutes. Statistical analyses were completed comparing the two groups in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics, surgeon response time, ED disposition, ED LOS, and facility mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 1,076 patients were treated during the 4-year period. The type of trauma, age, and Injury Severity Score were similar between the two groups. The mean (+/-SD) surgeon response times before and after the rule change were 14.8 minutes (+/-19.4 minutes) and 15.5 minutes (+/-22.3 minutes), respectively. The two groups also had similar ED LOS (mean = 2.9, median = 2.5 for both groups), rates of transfer to higher level centers (34.4% vs. 32.8%; p = 0.58), and facility mortality rates (10.0% vs. 11.2%; p = 0.55).

CONCLUSION

The extension of the surgeon response time from 15 minutes to 30 minutes did not adversely affect the outcomes of trauma patients at Ohio's level III trauma centers. Furthermore, the surgeon response time was similar before and after the rule change.

摘要

背景

美国外科医师学会创伤委员会关于创伤中心认证的指南规定,在重伤患者到达后的15分钟内,责任外科医生应到场。最近,这些指南有所放宽,将三级创伤中心的响应时间延长至30分钟。本研究评估了这一指南变化对俄亥俄州三级创伤中心医疗服务提供的潜在影响。我们假设,在该规定颁布后,即三级创伤中心外科医生响应时间从15分钟延长至30分钟后,急诊科住院时间(LOS)、急诊科处置情况和机构死亡率不会有可测量的差异。

方法

从俄亥俄州13家三级创伤中心的创伤登记处收集数据,时间从响应时间延长至30分钟的2004年6月30日之前2年开始,到之后2年结束。完成统计分析,比较两组在人口统计学和临床特征、外科医生响应时间、急诊科处置情况、急诊科住院时间和机构死亡率方面的差异。

结果

在这4年期间共治疗了1076例患者。两组之间的创伤类型、年龄和损伤严重程度评分相似。规则改变前后外科医生的平均(±标准差)响应时间分别为14.8分钟(±19.4分钟)和15.5分钟(±22.3分钟)。两组的急诊科住院时间也相似(两组均值均为2.9,中位数均为2.5),转至更高级别中心的比例(34.4%对32.8%;p = 0.58)以及机构死亡率(10.0%对11.2%;p = 0.55)。

结论

外科医生响应时间从15分钟延长至30分钟并未对俄亥俄州三级创伤中心创伤患者的治疗结果产生不利影响。此外,规则改变前后外科医生的响应时间相似。

相似文献

1
The effect of a change in the surgeon response time mandate on outcomes within Ohio level III trauma centers: it is all about commitment.外科医生响应时间要求的改变对俄亥俄州三级创伤中心治疗结果的影响:一切都关乎投入。
J Trauma. 2010 May;68(5):1038-43. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181d486e9.
2
The presence of in-house attending trauma surgeons does not improve management or outcome of critically injured patients.医院内部创伤外科主治医生的存在并不能改善重伤患者的管理或治疗结果。
J Trauma. 2003 Jul;55(1):20-5. doi: 10.1097/01.TA.0000071621.39088.7B.
3
Enhanced trauma program commitment at a level I trauma center: effect on the process and outcome of care.一级创伤中心加强创伤项目投入:对护理过程及结果的影响
Arch Surg. 2003 Aug;138(8):838-43. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.138.8.838.
4
Trauma systems and timing of patient transfer: are we improving?创伤系统与患者转运时机:我们是否在进步?
Am J Emerg Med. 2008 May;26(4):465-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2007.05.013.
5
Effective triage can ameliorate the deleterious effects of delayed transfer of trauma patients from the emergency department to the ICU.有效的分诊可以改善创伤患者从急诊科延迟转运至重症监护病房所产生的有害影响。
J Am Coll Surg. 2009 May;208(5):671-8; discussion 678-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.11.018. Epub 2009 Mar 26.
6
Improving outcomes in a regional trauma system: impact of a level III trauma center.改善区域创伤系统的治疗效果:三级创伤中心的影响
Am J Surg. 2006 Nov;192(5):685-9. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.11.006.
7
Extending surgeon response times in tier 2 traumas does not adversely affect patient outcomes.延长二级创伤中外科医生的反应时间不会对患者的治疗结果产生不利影响。
J Surg Res. 2018 Jun;226:24-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2017.12.037. Epub 2018 Feb 10.
8
Level I versus Level II trauma centers: an outcomes-based assessment.一级创伤中心与二级创伤中心:基于结果的评估。
J Trauma. 2009 May;66(5):1321-6. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181929e2b.
9
The impact of implementing a 24/7 open trauma bed protocol in the surgical intensive care unit on throughput and outcomes.24/7 开放创伤床位协议在外科重症监护病房对吞吐量和结果的影响。
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013 Jul;75(1):97-101. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31829849e5.
10
Pediatric trauma patients with isolated airway compromise or Glasgow Coma Scale less than 8: does immediate attending surgeon's presence upon arrival make a difference?单纯气道受损或格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分低于8分的儿科创伤患者:到达时主治外科医生立即在场会有不同吗?
J Pediatr Surg. 2005 Jan;40(1):103-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2004.09.029.