Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health | McGill University, Charles Meredith House, 1130 Pine Avenue West, Room B9, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 1A3, Canada.
Department of Social and Preventative Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Syst Rev. 2019 Nov 28;8(1):292. doi: 10.1186/s13643-019-1239-6.
The implementation of trauma systems in many high-income countries over the last 50 years has led to important reductions in injury mortality and disability in many healthcare jurisdictions. Injury organizations including the American College of Surgeons and the Trauma Association of Canada as well as the World Health Organization provide consensus-based recommendations on resources and processes for optimal injury care. Many hospitals treating trauma patients seek verification to demonstrate that they meet these recommendations. This process may be labeled differently across jurisdictions. In Canada for example, it is called accreditation, but it has the same objective and very similar modalities. The objective of the study described in this protocol is to systematically review evidence on the effectiveness of trauma center verification for improving clinical processes and patient outcomes in injury care.
We will perform a systematic review of studies evaluating the association between trauma center verification and hospital mortality (primary outcome), as well as morbidity, resource utilization, and processes of care (secondary outcomes). We will search CINAHL, EMBASE, HealthStar, MEDLINE, and ProQuest databases, as well as key injury organization websites for gray literature. We will assess the methodological quality of studies using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) assessment tool. We are planning to conduct a meta-analysis if feasible based on the number of included studies and their heterogeneity. We will evaluate the quality of cumulative evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group methodology.
This review will provide a synthesis of the body of evidence on trauma center verification effectiveness. Results could reinforce current verification modalities and may suggest ways to optimize them. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at an international clinical conference.
PROSPERO CRD42018107083.
在过去的 50 年中,许多高收入国家实施了创伤系统,这导致许多医疗保健管辖区的伤害死亡率和残疾率都有了重要降低。包括美国外科医师学院和加拿大创伤协会以及世界卫生组织在内的伤害组织就最佳伤害护理的资源和流程提供了基于共识的建议。许多治疗创伤患者的医院寻求验证,以证明他们符合这些建议。这一过程在不同的司法管辖区可能有不同的标签。例如,在加拿大,它被称为认证,但它的目的和非常相似的模式是相同的。本研究方案中描述的研究目的是系统回顾关于创伤中心验证在改善伤害护理的临床流程和患者结局方面的有效性的证据。
我们将对评估创伤中心验证与医院死亡率(主要结局)以及发病率、资源利用和护理流程(次要结局)之间关联的研究进行系统回顾。我们将在 CINAHL、EMBASE、HealthStar、MEDLINE 和 ProQuest 数据库以及关键伤害组织网站上搜索灰色文献。我们将使用非随机干预措施的风险偏倚评估工具(ROBINS-I)评估研究的方法学质量。我们计划根据纳入研究的数量及其异质性,在可行的情况下进行荟萃分析。我们将使用推荐评估、制定和评估(GRADE)工作组方法评估累积证据质量和推荐强度。
本综述将对创伤中心验证效果的证据进行综合。结果可能会加强当前的验证模式,并可能提出优化这些模式的方法。结果将发表在同行评议的期刊上,并在国际临床会议上展示。
PROSPERO CRD42018107083。