Dijkink Suzan, van der Wilden Gwendolyn M, Krijnen Pieta, Dol Lisa, Rhemrev Steven, King David R, DeMoya Marc A, Velmahos George C, Schipper Inger B
Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands.
Injury. 2018 Jan;49(1):104-109. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.10.021. Epub 2017 Oct 10.
Modern trauma systems differ worldwide, possibly leading to disparities in outcomes. We aim to compare characteristics and outcomes of blunt polytrauma patients admitted to two Level 1 Trauma Centers in the US (USTC) and the Netherlands (NTC).
For this retrospective study the records of 1367 adult blunt trauma patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 16 admitted between July 1, 2011 and December 31, 2013 (640 from NTC, 727 from USTC) were analysed.
The USTC group had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (mean [standard deviation] 1.15 [2.2] vs. 1.73 [2.8], p<0.0001) and Injury Severity Score (median [interquartile range, IQR] 25 [17-29] vs. 21 [17-26], p<0.0001). The in-hospital mortality was similar in both centers (11% in USTC vs. 10% NTC), also after correction for baseline differences in patient population in a multivariable analysis (adjusted odds ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.61-1.48, p=0.83). USTC patients had a longer Intensive Care Unit stay (median [IQR] 4 [2-11] vs. 2 [2-7] days, p=0.006) but had a shorter hospital stay (median [IQR] 6 [3-13] vs. 8 [4-16] days, p<0.0001). USTC patients were discharged more often to a rehabilitation center (47% vs 10%) and less often to home (46% vs. 66%, p<0.0001), and had a higher readmission rate (8% vs. 4%, p=0.01).
Although several outcome parameters differ in two urban area trauma centers in the USA and the Netherlands, the quality of care for trauma patients, measured as survival, is equal. Other outcomes varied between both trauma centers, suggesting that differences in local policies and processes do influence the care system, but not so much the quality of care as reflected by survival.
全球现代创伤系统各不相同,这可能导致治疗结果存在差异。我们旨在比较美国(USTC)和荷兰(NTC)两家一级创伤中心收治的钝性多发伤患者的特征和治疗结果。
对于这项回顾性研究,分析了2011年7月1日至2013年12月31日期间收治的1367例损伤严重程度评分(ISS)≥16的成年钝性创伤患者的记录(NTC有640例,USTC有727例)。
USTC组的查尔森合并症指数更高(均值[标准差]1.15[2.2] vs. 1.73[2.8],p<0.0001),损伤严重程度评分也更高(中位数[四分位间距,IQR]25[17 - 29] vs. 21[17 - 26],p<0.0001)。两个中心的院内死亡率相似(USTC为11%,NTC为10%),在多变量分析中对患者群体的基线差异进行校正后也是如此(调整后的优势比为0.95,95%置信区间为0.61 - 1.48,p = 0.83)。USTC患者的重症监护病房住院时间更长(中位数[IQR]4[2 - 11]天 vs. 2[2 - 7]天,p = 0.006),但住院时间更短(中位数[IQR]6[3 - 13]天 vs. 8[4 - 16]天,p<0.0001)。USTC患者出院后更常被送往康复中心(47% vs 10%),回家的比例更低(46% vs. 66%,p<0.0001),再入院率更高(8% vs. 4%,p = 0.01)。
尽管美国和荷兰两个城市地区创伤中心的几个治疗结果参数存在差异,但以生存率衡量的创伤患者护理质量是相同的。两个创伤中心的其他治疗结果有所不同,这表明当地政策和流程的差异确实会影响护理系统,但对以生存率反映的护理质量影响不大。