Maull K I, Schwab C W, McHenry S D, Leavy P, Carl L, Woo P, Overholt S, Sinclair T, Aprahamian C
J Trauma. 1986 Jun;26(6):521-4. doi: 10.1097/00005373-198606000-00005.
Sanctioned trauma center designation began in the late 1970's to improve hospital capabilities to care for injured patients. Guided by criteria established by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma and led by surgeons dedicated to improving trauma care, many states focused early on the quality of care issue only to later struggle with the political consequences that followed the designation process. Institutional commitment to trauma care was often stated but seldom measured. Unlike the designation process with its strong emphasis on capabilities assessment, the verification process focused on performance documentation. Confirmation was sought in response time of key personnel, completeness of registry database, and trauma death audits. Trauma Committee minutes were reviewed and prehospital personnel interviewed to confirm institutional involvement in paramedic education and overall EMS system design. Other areas of documentation included trauma education at all levels, research, nursing audits, and outreach programs. We conclude that trauma center designation and verification are both essential and complementary. Effective trauma system performance requires trauma center designation plus a verification process to confirm institutional commitment of these resources for optimal care of the injured patient.
创伤中心指定认证始于20世纪70年代末,目的是提高医院护理受伤患者的能力。在美国外科医师学会创伤委员会制定的标准指导下,由致力于改善创伤护理的外科医生牵头,许多州早期仅关注护理质量问题,后来却在指定认证过程带来的政治后果中挣扎。机构对创伤护理的承诺虽常被提及,但很少得到衡量。与高度重视能力评估的指定认证过程不同,核查过程侧重于绩效记录。核查内容包括关键人员的响应时间、登记数据库的完整性以及创伤死亡审计。审查创伤委员会会议记录并采访院前急救人员,以确认机构在护理人员教育和整体急救医疗服务系统设计方面的参与情况。其他记录领域包括各级创伤教育、研究、护理审计和外展项目。我们得出结论,创伤中心指定认证和核查都是必不可少且相辅相成的。有效的创伤系统运作需要创伤中心指定认证加上一个核查过程,以确认这些资源在机构层面用于为受伤患者提供最佳护理的承诺。