From the Department of Trauma and Burn Surgery (C-Y.F., F.B., L.T., C.B., F.S., A.D., M.K., T.M., V.S., K.K., S.P. C-T.C., J.M., F.B.), Stroger Hospital of Cook County, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois; and Department of Trauma and Emergency Surgery (C-Y.F., C-T.C.), Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan City, Taiwan.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2019 Jun;86(6):961-966. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000002245.
The recognition of the relationship between volume and outcomes led to the regionalization of trauma care. The relationship between trauma mechanism-subtype and outcomes has yet to be explored. We hypothesized that trauma centers with a high volume of penetrating trauma patients might be associated with a higher survival rate for penetrating trauma patients.
A retrospective cohort analysis of penetrating trauma patients presenting between 2011 and 2015 was conducted using the National Trauma Database and the trauma registry at the Stroger Cook County Hospital. Linear regression was used to determine the relationship between mortality and the annual volume of penetrating trauma seen by the treating hospital.
Nationally, penetrating injuries account for 9.5% of the trauma cases treated. Patients treated within the top quartile penetrating-volume hospitals (≥167 penetrating cases per annum) are more severely injured (Injury Severity Score: 8.9 vs. 7.7) than those treated at the lowest quartile penetrating volume centers (<36.6 patients per annum). There was a lower mortality rate at institutions that treated high numbers of penetrating trauma patients per annum. A penetrating trauma mortality risk adjustment model showed that the volume of penetrating trauma patients was an independent factor associated with survival rate.
Trauma centers with high penetrating trauma patient volumes are associated with improved survival of these patients. This association with improved survival does not hold true for the total trauma volume at a center but is specific to the volume of the penetrating trauma subtype.
Prognostic/Epidemiology Study, Level-III; Therapeutic/Care Management, Level IV.
对容量与结果之间关系的认识导致了创伤救治的区域化。创伤机制-亚型与结果之间的关系尚未得到探索。我们假设,大量接受穿透性创伤患者的创伤中心可能与穿透性创伤患者的生存率更高有关。
使用国家创伤数据库和斯特罗格库克县医院的创伤登记处,对 2011 年至 2015 年期间就诊的穿透性创伤患者进行回顾性队列分析。线性回归用于确定死亡率与治疗医院每年接受的穿透性创伤量之间的关系。
在全国范围内,穿透性损伤占接受治疗的创伤病例的 9.5%。在穿透性容量较高的医院(每年≥167 例穿透性病例)接受治疗的患者比在穿透性容量较低的医院(每年<36.6 例患者)的患者受伤更严重(损伤严重程度评分:8.9 比 7.7)。每年接受大量穿透性创伤患者治疗的机构死亡率较低。穿透性创伤死亡率风险调整模型表明,穿透性创伤患者的数量是与生存率相关的独立因素。
接受大量穿透性创伤患者的创伤中心与这些患者的生存率提高有关。这种与生存率提高的关联不适用于中心的总创伤量,而是特定于穿透性创伤亚型的量。
预后/流行病学研究,III 级;治疗/护理管理,IV 级。