Department of Surgery, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania3Department of Surgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
Department of Public Health Sciences, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania.
JAMA Surg. 2014 Apr;149(4):319-26. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.4834.
In trauma populations, improvements in outcome are documented in institutions with higher case volumes. However, it is not known whether improved outcomes are attributable to the case volume within specific higher-risk groups, such as the elderly, or to the case volume among all trauma patients treated by an institution.
To test the hypothesis that outcomes of trauma care for geriatric patients are affected differently by the volume of geriatric cases and nongeriatric cases of an institution.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study using a statewide trauma registry was set in state-designated levels 1 and 2 trauma centers in Pennsylvania. It included 39 431 eligible geriatric trauma patients (aged >65 years) in the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study.
In-hospital mortality, major complications, and mortality after major complications (failure to rescue).
Between 2001 and 2010, 39 431 geriatric trauma patients and 105 046 nongeriatric patients were captured in a review of outcomes in 20 state-designated levels 1 and 2 trauma centers. Larger volumes of geriatric trauma patients were significantly associated with lower odds of in-hospital mortality, major complications, and failure to rescue. In contrast, larger nongeriatric trauma volumes were significantly associated with higher odds of major complications in geriatric patients.
Higher rates of in-hospital mortality, major complications, and failure to rescue were associated with lower volumes of geriatric trauma care and paradoxically with higher volumes of trauma care for younger patients. These findings offer the possibility that outcomes might be improved with differentiated pathways of care for geriatric trauma patients.
在创伤人群中,在病例量较高的机构中记录到了预后的改善。然而,尚不清楚改善的结果是归因于特定高风险人群(如老年人)的病例量,还是归因于机构治疗的所有创伤患者的病例量。
检验以下假设,即机构的老年病例量和非老年病例量对老年创伤患者的创伤护理结局的影响不同。
设计、设置和参与者:这是一项使用全州创伤登记处的回顾性队列研究,在宾夕法尼亚州的州指定 1 级和 2 级创伤中心进行。它包括宾夕法尼亚州创伤结局研究中 39431 名符合条件的老年创伤患者(年龄>65 岁)。
院内死亡率、主要并发症以及主要并发症后的死亡率(抢救失败)。
在 2001 年至 2010 年期间,在对 20 家州指定 1 级和 2 级创伤中心的结果进行审查中,共纳入了 39431 名老年创伤患者和 105046 名非老年患者。老年创伤患者的病例量越大,院内死亡率、主要并发症和抢救失败的可能性就越低。相反,非老年创伤患者的病例量越大,老年患者发生主要并发症的可能性就越高。
较高的院内死亡率、主要并发症和抢救失败的发生率与老年创伤护理的病例量较低有关,而与年轻患者的创伤护理的病例量较高有关。这些发现提供了这样一种可能性,即通过为老年创伤患者提供差异化的护理途径,可能会改善预后。