Suppr超能文献

护理人员转运与私人交通工具转运创伤患者。对治疗结果的影响。

Paramedic vs private transportation of trauma patients. Effect on outcome.

作者信息

Demetriades D, Chan L, Cornwell E, Belzberg H, Berne T V, Asensio J, Chan D, Eckstein M, Alo K

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA.

出版信息

Arch Surg. 1996 Feb;131(2):133-8. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1996.01430140023007.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) play a major role in any trauma system. However, there is very little information regarding the role of prehospital emergency care in trauma. To investigate this issue, we compared the outcome of severely injured patients transported by paramedics (EMS group) with the outcome of those transported by friends, relatives, bystanders, or police (non-EMS group).

DESIGN

We compared 4856 EMS patients with 926 non-EMS patients. General linear model analysis was performed to test the hypothesis that hospital mortality is the same in EMS and non-EMS cases, controlling for the following confounding factors, which are not affected by mode of transportation: age, gender, mechanism of injury, cause of injury, Injury Severity Score (ISS), and severe head injury. Crude, specific, and adjusted mortality rates and relative risks were also derived for the EMS and non-EMS groups.

SETTING

Large, urban, academic level I trauma center.

PATIENTS

All patients meeting the criteria for major trauma.

RESULTS

The two groups were similar with regard to mechanism of injury and the need for surgery or intensive care unit admission. The crude mortality rate was 9.3% in the EMS group and 4.0% in the non-EMS group (relative risk, 2.32; P < .001). After adjustment for ISS, the relative risk was 1.60 (P = .002). Subgroup analysis showed that among patients with ISS greater than 15, those in the EMS group had a mortality rate twice that of those in the non-EMS group (28.8% vs 14.1%). After controlling for confounding factors, the adjusted mortality among patients with ISS greater than 15 was 28.2% for the EMS group and 17.9% for the non-EMS group (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe trauma transported by private means in this setting have better survival than those transported via the EMS system. Large prospective studies are needed to identify the factors responsible for this difference.

摘要

背景

院前急救医疗服务(EMS)在任何创伤系统中都发挥着重要作用。然而,关于院前急救在创伤中的作用的信息非常少。为了研究这个问题,我们比较了由护理人员运送的重伤患者(EMS组)与由朋友、亲属、旁观者或警察运送的患者(非EMS组)的结局。

设计

我们将4856例EMS患者与926例非EMS患者进行了比较。进行了一般线性模型分析,以检验EMS组和非EMS组医院死亡率相同的假设,并控制以下不受运输方式影响的混杂因素:年龄、性别、损伤机制、损伤原因、损伤严重度评分(ISS)和重度颅脑损伤。还得出了EMS组和非EMS组的粗死亡率、特定死亡率、调整后死亡率以及相对风险。

地点

大型城市一级学术创伤中心。

患者

所有符合严重创伤标准的患者。

结果

两组在损伤机制以及手术或入住重症监护病房的需求方面相似。EMS组的粗死亡率为9.3%,非EMS组为4.0%(相对风险为2.32;P <.001)。调整ISS后,相对风险为1.60(P = .002)。亚组分析表明,在ISS大于15的患者中,EMS组的死亡率是非EMS组的两倍(28.8%对14.1%)。在控制混杂因素后,ISS大于15的患者中,EMS组的调整后死亡率为28.2%,非EMS组为17.9%(P <.001)。

结论

在这种情况下,通过私人方式运送的严重创伤患者比通过EMS系统运送的患者有更好的生存率。需要进行大型前瞻性研究来确定造成这种差异的因素。

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