首页> 外文期刊>The American surgeon. >Right Patient, Right Place, Right Time: Field Triage and Transfer to Level I Trauma Centers
【24h】

Right Patient, Right Place, Right Time: Field Triage and Transfer to Level I Trauma Centers

机译:正确的患者,正确的地方,正确的时间:现场分类和转移到I级Trauma中心

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Introduction: This study sought to compare the outcomes of trauma patients taken directly from the field to a level I trauma center (direct) versus patients that were first brought to a level III trauma center prior to being transferred to a level I (transfer) within our inclusive Delaware trauma system.Methods: A retrospective review of the level I center's trauma registry was performed using data from 2013 to 2017 for patients brought to a single level I trauma center from two surrounding counties. The direct cohort consisted of 362 patients, while the transfer cohort contained 204 patients. Linear regression analysis was performed to investigate hospital length of stay (LOS), while logistic regression was used for mortality, complications, and craniotomy. Covariates included age, gender, county, and injury severity score (ISS). Propensity score weighting was also performed between the direct and transfer cohorts.Results: When adjusting for age, gender, ISS, and county, transferred patients demonstrated worse outcomes compared to direct patients in both the regression and propensity score analyses. Transferred patients were at increased risk of mortality (OR 2.17, CI 1. 10-4.37, P = .027) and craniotomy (OR 3.92, CI 1.87-8.72, P < .001). Age was predictive of mortality (P < .001). ISS was predictive of increased risk of mortality (P < .001), increased LOS (P < .001), and craniotomy (P < .001). Older age, Sussex County, and higher ISS were predictive of patients being transferred (P < .001).Discussion: Delays in presentation to our level I trauma center resulted in worse outcomes. Patients that meet criteria should be considered for transport directly to the highest level trauma center in the system to avoid delays in care.
机译:导言:本研究旨在比较直接从现场带到一级创伤中心(direct)的创伤患者与在特拉华州创伤系统内转移到一级(transfer)之前先被带到三级创伤中心的患者的结果。方法:使用2013年至2017年的数据,对一级中心的创伤登记进行回顾性审查,这些数据来自周边两个县的一级创伤中心。直接队列包括362名患者,而转移队列包括204名患者。线性回归分析用于调查住院时间(LOS),而逻辑回归分析用于死亡率、并发症和开颅手术。协变量包括年龄、性别、县和损伤严重程度评分(ISS)。倾向评分权重也在直接队列和转移队列之间进行。结果:在对年龄、性别、ISS和县进行调整后,在回归分析和倾向评分分析中,转院患者的预后比直接患者差。转移患者的死亡率(OR 2.17,CI 1.10-4.37,P=0.027)和开颅手术(OR 3.92,CI 1.87-8.72,P<0.001)风险增加。年龄是死亡率的预测因素(P<0.001)。ISS可预测死亡风险增加(P<0.001)、LOS增加(P<0.001)和开颅手术(P<0.001)。年龄越大、苏塞克斯县和ISS越高,患者被转移的可能性越大(P<0.001)。讨论:延迟向一级创伤中心报告会导致更糟糕的结果。应考虑将符合标准的患者直接送往系统中最高级别的创伤中心,以避免护理延误。

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