定义创伤患者紧急转院的障碍:对伊利诺伊州非创伤和低级别创伤中心重新分类过程的评估。
Defining obstacles to emergency transfer of trauma patients: An evaluation of retriage processes from nontrauma and lower-level Illinois trauma centers.
机构信息
Surgical Outcomes and Quality Improvement Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.
Department of Neurology, Center for Healthcare Delivery Science and Innovation, University of Chicago, IL.
出版信息
Surgery. 2022 Dec;172(6):1860-1865. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2022.08.027. Epub 2022 Oct 1.
BACKGROUND
Retriage is the emergency transfer of severely injured patients from nontrauma and lower-level trauma centers to higher-level trauma centers. We identified the barriers to retriage at sending centers in a single health system.
METHODS
We conducted a failure modes effects and criticality analysis at 4 nontrauma centers and 5 lower-level trauma centers in a single health system. Clinicians from each center described the steps in the trauma assessment and retriage process to create a process map. We used standardized scoring to characterize each failure based on frequency, impact on retriage, and prevention safeguards. We ranked each failure using the scores to calculate a risk priority number.
RESULTS
We identified 26 steps and 93 failures. The highest-risk failure was refusal by higher-level trauma centers (receiving hospitals) to accept a patient. The most critical failures in the retriage process based on total risk, frequency, and safeguard scores were (1) refusal from a receiving higher-level trauma center to accept a patient (risk priority number = 191), (2) delay in a sending center's consultant examination of a patient in the emergency department (risk priority number = 177), and (3) delay in receiving hospital's consultant calling back (risk priority number = 177).
CONCLUSION
We identified (1) addressing obstacles to determining clinical indications for retriage and (2) identifying receiving level I trauma centers who would accept the patient as opportunities to increase timely retriage. Establishing clear clinical indications for retriage that sending and receiving hospitals agree on represents an opportunity for intervention that could improve the retriage of injured patients.
背景
重新分类是将严重受伤的患者从非创伤和低级别创伤中心紧急转移到高级别创伤中心的过程。我们在单一医疗体系中确定了发送中心重新分类的障碍。
方法
我们在一个单一医疗体系中的 4 个非创伤中心和 5 个低级别创伤中心进行了失效模式效果和关键性分析。每个中心的临床医生描述了创伤评估和重新分类过程的步骤,以创建过程图。我们使用标准化评分根据频率、对重新分类的影响和预防措施来描述每个故障。我们根据分数对每个故障进行排名,以计算风险优先级编号。
结果
我们确定了 26 个步骤和 93 个故障。风险最高的故障是高级别创伤中心(接收医院)拒绝接收患者。重新分类过程中基于总风险、频率和安全保障评分的最关键故障是:(1) 接收的高级别创伤中心拒绝接收患者(风险优先级编号 191);(2) 发送中心的顾问在急诊室对患者进行检查时出现延误(风险优先级编号 177);(3) 接收医院的顾问回电延误(风险优先级编号 177)。
结论
我们确定了(1)解决重新分类的临床指征确定障碍,(2)确定愿意接收患者的一级创伤中心,这是增加及时重新分类的机会。建立发送和接收医院都同意的明确重新分类临床指征是一个可以改善受伤患者重新分类的干预机会。