Gibbons J P, Breathnach O, Quinlan J F
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, 24, Ireland.
Ir J Med Sci. 2017 Feb;186(1):33-39. doi: 10.1007/s11845-016-1403-0. Epub 2016 Jan 27.
This is a retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients requiring emergency aeromedical services (EAS) to a level II trauma centre. This analysis was performed to evaluate the new service to Tallaght Hospital in terms of: the criteria used for dispatch, an estimate of baseline efficiency of time critical management of patients, the cross-catchment transfer of patients.
Data were provided by the EAS with respect to the patients brought to Tallaght Hospital not including inter-facility transfers for the calendar year 2013. Using this information patient records were matched to the electronic database. Once patients were identified, their hospital journey was catalogued using chart review. Using Google Maps and the EAS data an estimated road-time was calculated. Specific dispatch criteria were unavailable, however, using five broad categories outlined by the American College of Surgeons (ACS) for trauma related dispatch criteria each case was evaluated.
The EAS data had 52 cases which were reported to come to this unit. 48 patient records were accurately matched to this data. 25 % were discharged without speciality input. Seven patients died within 24 h only one of which was admitted under a speciality. 30 patients were admitted under specialist care with two requiring transfer to another centre. 80 % of admissions came under the primary management of the orthopaedic team. 11 patients required operative management, five required ICU management, three required chest drains and one patient required cardiac angiogram. Of the five dispatch criteria categories evaluated the mean number of criteria met was 3.1.
25 % of the patients were managed in the Emergency Department alone indicating an acceptable level of over-triage according to ACS guidelines. When comparing the dispatch criteria met for this 25 % there was no statistical difference compared with the other 75 %. Sensitivity and specificity analyses have looked at the question of dispatch criteria before and our data are comparable with international evidence. We suggest that further research be undertaken to develop this service to improve activation criteria and thereby the entire service delivered.
这是一项对所有连续需要紧急航空医疗服务(EAS)转运至二级创伤中心的患者进行的回顾性分析。进行此项分析是为了从以下方面评估为塔拉赫特医院提供的新服务:调度所使用的标准、对患者时间关键管理的基线效率估计、患者的跨区域转运情况。
EAS提供了2013年全年送至塔拉赫特医院患者的数据,但不包括机构间转运。利用这些信息将患者记录与电子数据库进行匹配。一旦确定患者身份,通过病历审查对其住院过程进行分类。使用谷歌地图和EAS数据计算估计的路途时间。虽然没有具体的调度标准,但根据美国外科医师学会(ACS)概述的与创伤相关的调度标准的五个宽泛类别对每个病例进行了评估。
EAS数据中有52例报告来到本单位。48份患者记录与该数据准确匹配。25%的患者未经专科干预就出院了。7名患者在24小时内死亡,其中只有1名是在专科治疗下入院的。30名患者在专科护理下入院,其中2名需要转至另一中心。80%的入院患者由骨科团队进行主要管理。11名患者需要手术治疗,5名需要重症监护病房管理,3名需要胸腔引流,1名患者需要心脏血管造影。在所评估的五个调度标准类别中,平均符合的标准数量为3.1。
25%的患者仅在急诊科接受治疗,根据ACS指南,这表明过度分诊水平可接受。在比较这25%患者符合的调度标准与其他75%患者时,未发现统计学差异。敏感性和特异性分析研究了之前的调度标准问题,我们的数据与国际证据具有可比性。我们建议开展进一步研究以改进这项服务,完善启动标准,从而改善整个服务质量。