Suppr超能文献

避免克里巴里僵局 2:标准化分诊评估工具在 38 家成人和儿科创伤中心的表现优于克里巴里矩阵方法。

Avoiding Cribari gridlock 2: The standardized triage assessment tool outperforms the Cribari matrix method in 38 adult and pediatric trauma centers.

机构信息

3409 Worth St, Pickens Building, Ste C2.500, Dallas, TX 75246 USA.

2500 Rocky Mountain Ave, Loveland, CO 80538 USA.

出版信息

Injury. 2021 Mar;52(3):443-449. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2020.09.027. Epub 2020 Sep 16.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The Cribari Matrix Method (CMM) is the current standard to identify over/undertriage but requires manual trauma triage reviews to address its inadequacies. The Standardized Triage Assessment Tool (STAT) partially emulates triage review by combining CMM with the Need For Trauma Intervention, an indicator of major trauma. This study aimed to validate STAT in a multicenter sample.

METHODS

Thirty-eight adult and pediatric US trauma centers submitted data for 97,282 encounters. Mixed models estimated the effects of overtriage and undertriage versus appropriate triage on the odds of complication, odds of discharge to a continuing care facility, and differences in length of stay for both CMM and STAT. Significance was assessed at p <0.005.

RESULTS

Overtriage (53.49% vs. 30.79%) and undertriage (17.19% vs. 3.55%) rates were notably lower with STAT than with CMM. CMM and STAT had significant associations with all outcomes, with overtriages demonstrating lower injury burdens and undertriages showing higher injury burdens than appropriately triaged patients. STAT indicated significantly stronger associations with outcomes than CMM, except in odds of discharge to continuing care facility among patients who received a full trauma team activation where STAT and CMM were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

This multicenter study strongly indicates STAT safely and accurately flags fewer cases for triage reviews, thereby reducing the subjectivity introduced by manual triage determinations. This may enable better refinement of activation criteria and reduced workload.

摘要

目的

Cribari 矩阵方法(CMM)是目前识别过度/不足分诊的标准方法,但需要进行手动创伤分诊审查来解决其不足之处。标准化分诊评估工具(STAT)通过将 CMM 与创伤干预需求相结合(这是严重创伤的一个指标),部分模拟了分诊审查。本研究旨在多中心样本中验证 STAT。

方法

38 家美国成人和儿科创伤中心提交了 97282 例患者的数据。混合模型估计了过度分诊和不足分诊相对于适当分诊对并发症发生几率、转至持续护理机构几率以及 CMM 和 STAT 的住院时间差异的影响。在 p<0.005 时评估了显著性。

结果

与 CMM 相比,STAT 的过度分诊(53.49%比 30.79%)和不足分诊(17.19%比 3.55%)率明显降低。CMM 和 STAT 与所有结局均有显著关联,过度分诊患者的损伤负担较低,不足分诊患者的损伤负担较高。STAT 与结局的关联显著强于 CMM,除了在接受完整创伤团队激活的患者中,STAT 和 CMM 相似的情况下,向持续护理机构转院的几率。

结论

这项多中心研究强烈表明,STAT 更安全、更准确地标记出较少的分诊审查病例,从而减少了手动分诊决策带来的主观性。这可能使激活标准更加完善,并减轻工作量。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验