首页> 外文期刊>Academic Emergency Medicine >Survival Benefit of Transfer to Tertiary Trauma Centers for Major Trauma Patients Initially Presenting to Nontertiary Trauma Centers
【24h】

Survival Benefit of Transfer to Tertiary Trauma Centers for Major Trauma Patients Initially Presenting to Nontertiary Trauma Centers

机译:最初出现在非第三级创伤中心的主要创伤患者转移到第三级创伤中心的生存优势

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives: Recent evidence suggests a measurable reduction in mortality for patients transferred from a nontertiary trauma center (Level III or IV) to a Level I trauma center, but not for those transferred to a Level II trauma center. Whether this can be generalized to a predominantly rural region with fewer tertiary trauma care resources is uncertain. This study sought to evaluate mortality differences for patients initially presenting to nontertiary trauma centers in a predominantly rural region depending on transfer status.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients initially presenting to 104 nontertiary trauma centers in Oklahoma and meeting the state’s criteria for major trauma. Patients dying within 1 hour of emergency department (ED) arrival at the nontertiary trauma center were excluded. The exposure variable of interest was admission status, which was categorized as either transfer to a tertiary (Level I or II) trauma center within 24 hours or admission to a nontertiary trauma center. Propensity scores were used to minimize the selection bias inherent in the decision to admit or transfer a patient for higher-level care. Multiple logistic regression was used to generate three propensity score models: probability of transfer to either a Level I or II, Level I only, and Level II only. Propensity scores were then included as a covariate in multivariable Cox regression models assessing outcome differences between admitted and transferred patients. The outcome of interest was 30-day mortality, defined as death at either the nontertiary trauma center or the tertiary trauma center within 30 days of arrival at the initial Level III/IV center’s ED.Results: A total of 6,229 patients met study criteria, of whom 2,669 (43%) were transferred to tertiary trauma centers. Of those transferred, 1,422 patients (53%) were transferred to a Level I trauma center. Crude mortality was lower for patients transferred to tertiary trauma centers compared to those remaining at nontertiary trauma facilities (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.48 to 0.72). After adjusting for the propensity to be transferred, Injury Severity Score (ISS), presence of severe head injury, and age, transfer to a tertiary trauma center was associated with a significantly lower 30-day mortality (HR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.30 to 0.50) compared to admission and treatment at a nontertiary trauma center. The observed survival benefit was similar for patients transferred to a Level I trauma center (HR = 0.36; 95% CI = 0.20 to 0.4) and those transferred to a Level II center (HR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.61).Conclusions: This study suggests a survival benefit among patients initially presenting to nontertiary trauma centers who are subsequently transferred to tertiary trauma centers compared to those remaining in nontertiary trauma centers, even after adjusting for variables affecting the likelihood of transfer. Although this survival benefit was larger for patients treated at a Level I trauma center, Level II trauma centers in a region with few tertiary trauma resources demonstrated a measurable benefit as well.ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:1223–1232 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
机译:目的:最近的证据表明,从非第三级创伤中心(III或IV级)转移到I级创伤中心的患者的死亡率可测量地降低,但是对于转移到II级创伤中心的患者则没有显着降低的死亡率。能否将其推广到以三级创伤护理资源较少为主的农村地区尚不确定。这项研究试图评估主要在农村地区非三级创伤中心就诊的患者的死亡率差异,方法取决于转移状况。方法:这是一项回顾性队列研究,对最初在俄克拉荷马州104个非三级创伤中心就诊并符合该州标准的患者重大创伤。急诊科(ED)抵达非三级创伤中心1小时内死亡的患者被排除在外。所关注的暴露变量是入院状态,分为两类:在24小时内转移到第三级(I或II级)创伤中心或进入非第三级创伤中心。倾向得分用于最大程度地减少接纳或转移患者接受更高级别护理的决策中固有的选择偏见。使用多重逻辑回归生成三个倾向评分模型:转移到I级或II级,仅I级和II级的概率。然后将倾向得分作为协变量纳入多变量Cox回归模型中,以评估入院患者和转入患者之间的结局差异。感兴趣的结果是30天死亡率,定义为到达第三级/第四级中心ED时在30天内在非第三级创伤中心或第三级创伤中心死亡。结果:共有6,229例患者符合研究标准,其中2,669(43%)人被转移到第三创伤中心。在转移的患者中,有1,422名患者(53%)被转移到了I级创伤中心。转移至第三级创伤中心的患者的粗死亡率低于非第三级创伤设施的患者(危险比[HR] = 0.59; 95%置信区间[CI] = 0.48至0.72)。在调整了转移的倾向,伤害严重度评分(ISS),严重的头部损伤的存在和年龄,转移到第三级创伤中心后,与30天的死亡率显着降低相关(HR = 0.38; 95%CI = 0.30到0.50),而在非第三级创伤中心接受和治疗。对于转移到I级创伤中心(HR = 0.36; 95%CI = 0.20至0.4)的患者和转移到II级中心(HR = 0.45; 95%CI = 0.33至0.61)的患者观察到的生存获益相似。结论:这项研究表明,即使在对影响转移可能性的变量进行了调整之后,与最初的非第三级创伤中心相比,那些最初在非第三级创伤中心就诊,随后又转移至第三级创伤中心的患者仍具有生存优势。尽管对于I级创伤中心治疗的患者来说,这种生存收益更大,但在三级创伤资源很少的地区的II级创伤中心也显示出了可衡量的收益。ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:1223–1232©2010,学术急诊医学协会

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号