Department of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsin-Chu City, Taiwan.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
PLoS Med. 2020 Oct 6;17(10):e1003360. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003360. eCollection 2020 Oct.
Whether rapid transportation can benefit patients with trauma remains controversial. We determined the association between prehospital time and outcome to explore the concept of the "golden hour" for injured patients.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of trauma patients transported from the scene to hospitals by emergency medical service (EMS) from January 1, 2016, to November 30, 2018, using data from the Pan-Asia Trauma Outcomes Study (PATOS) database. Prehospital time intervals were categorized into response time (RT), scene to hospital time (SH), and total prehospital time (TPT). The outcomes were 30-day mortality and functional status at hospital discharge. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate the association of prehospital time and outcomes to adjust for factors including age, sex, mechanism and type of injury, Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and prehospital interventions. Overall, 24,365 patients from 4 countries (645 patients from Japan, 16,476 patients from Korea, 5,358 patients from Malaysia, and 1,886 patients from Taiwan) were included in the analysis. Among included patients, the median age was 45 years (lower quartile [Q1]-upper quartile [Q3]: 25-62), and 15,498 (63.6%) patients were male. Median (Q1-Q3) RT, SH, and TPT were 20 (Q1-Q3: 12-39), 21 (Q1-Q3: 16-29), and 47 (Q1-Q3: 32-60) minutes, respectively. In all, 280 patients (1.1%) died within 30 days after injury. Prehospital time intervals were not associated with 30-day mortality. The adjusted odds ratios (aORs) per 10 minutes of RT, SH, and TPT were 0.99 (95% CI 0.92-1.06, p = 0.740), 1.08 (95% CI 1.00-1.17, p = 0.065), and 1.03 (95% CI 0.98-1.09, p = 0.236), respectively. However, long prehospital time was detrimental to functional survival. The aORs of RT, SH, and TPT per 10-minute delay were 1.06 (95% CI 1.04-1.08, p < 0.001), 1.05 (95% CI 1.01-1.08, p = 0.007), and 1.06 (95% CI 1.04-1.08, p < 0.001), respectively. The key limitation of our study is the missing data inherent to the retrospective design. Another major limitation is the aggregate nature of the data from different countries and unaccounted confounders such as in-hospital management.
Longer prehospital time was not associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality, but it may be associated with increased risk of poor functional outcomes in injured patients. This finding supports the concept of the "golden hour" for trauma patients during prehospital care in the countries studied.
快速转运是否对创伤患者有益仍存在争议。我们确定了创伤患者的院前时间与结局之间的关系,以探索创伤患者的“黄金时间”概念。
我们对 2016 年 1 月 1 日至 2018 年 11 月 30 日期间通过紧急医疗服务(EMS)从现场转运至医院的创伤患者进行了回顾性队列研究,使用了来自泛亚创伤结局研究(PATOS)数据库的数据。院前时间间隔分为反应时间(RT)、现场至医院时间(SH)和总院前时间(TPT)。结局为 30 天死亡率和出院时的功能状态。多变量逻辑回归用于研究院前时间与结局之间的关系,以调整年龄、性别、损伤机制和类型、损伤严重程度评分(ISS)、修订创伤评分(RTS)和院前干预等因素。共有来自 4 个国家(日本 645 例、韩国 16476 例、马来西亚 5358 例和中国台湾 1886 例)的 24365 例患者纳入分析。纳入患者的中位年龄为 45 岁(下四分位数[Q1]-上四分位数[Q3]:25-62),15498 例(63.6%)为男性。中位(Q1-Q3)RT、SH 和 TPT 分别为 20 分钟(Q1-Q3:12-39)、21 分钟(Q1-Q3:16-29)和 47 分钟(Q1-Q3:32-60)。共有 280 例(1.1%)患者在受伤后 30 天内死亡。院前时间间隔与 30 天死亡率无关。RT、SH 和 TPT 每增加 10 分钟的调整比值比(aOR)分别为 0.99(95%CI 0.92-1.06,p=0.740)、1.08(95%CI 1.00-1.17,p=0.065)和 1.03(95%CI 0.98-1.09,p=0.236)。然而,长时间的院前时间对功能存活不利。RT、SH 和 TPT 每增加 10 分钟的 aOR 分别为 1.06(95%CI 1.04-1.08,p<0.001)、1.05(95%CI 1.01-1.08,p=0.007)和 1.06(95%CI 1.04-1.08,p<0.001)。本研究的主要局限性是回顾性设计固有的缺失数据和数据的汇总性质以及未考虑到的混杂因素,如院内管理。
较长的院前时间与 30 天死亡率增加无关,但可能与创伤患者的功能结局不良风险增加有关。这一发现支持了在研究国家中创伤患者在院前护理期间存在“黄金时间”的概念。