Measuring quality in trauma care

Perceived usefulness of trauma audit filters in urban India: a mixed-methods multicentre Delphi study comparing filters from the WHO and low and middle-income countries

OBJECTIVE

To compare experts' perceived usefulness of audit filters from Ghana, Cameroon, WHO and those locally developed; generate context-appropriate audit filters for trauma care in selected hospitals in urban India; and explore characteristics of audit filters that correlate to perceived usefulness.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods approach using a multicentre online Delphi technique.

SETTING

Two large tertiary hospitals in urban India.

METHODS

Filters were rated on a scale from 1 to 10 in terms of perceived usefulness, with the option to add new filters and comments. The filters were categorised into three groups depending on their origin: low and middle-income countries (LMIC), WHO and New (locally developed), and their scores compared. Significance was determined using Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Wilcoxon rank-sum test. We performed a content analysis of the comments.

RESULTS

26 predefined and 15 new filter suggestions were evaluated. The filters had high usefulness scores (mean overall score 9.01 of 10), with the LMIC filters having significantly higher scores compared with those from WHO and those newly added. Three themes were identified in the content analysis relating to medical relevance, feasibility and specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

Audit filters from other LMICs were deemed highly useful in the urban India context. This may indicate that the transferability of defined trauma audit filters between similar contexts is high and that these can provide a starting point when implemented as part of trauma quality improvement programmes in low-resource settings.

Designing and conducting initial application of a performance assessment model for in-hospital trauma care

BACKGROUND

Trauma is a major cause of death worldwide, especially in Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC). The increase in health care costs and the differences in the quality of provided services indicates the need for trauma care evaluation. This study was done to develop and use a performance assessment model for in-hospital trauma care focusing on traffic injures.

METHODS

This multi-method study was conducted in three main phases of determining indicators, model development, and model application. Trauma care performance indicators were extracted through literature review and confirmed using a two-round Delphi survey and experts' perspectives. Two focus group discussions and 16 semi-structured interviews were conducted to design the prototype. In the next step, components and the final form of the model were confirmed following pre-determined factors, including importance and necessity, simplicity, clarity, and relevance. Finally, the model was tested by applying it in a trauma center.

RESULTS

A total of 50 trauma care indicators were approved after reviewing the literature and obtaining the experts' views. The final model consisted of six components of assessment level, teams, methods, scheduling, frequency, and data source. The model application revealed problems of a selected trauma center in terms of information recording, patient deposition, some clinical services, waiting time for deposit, recording medical errors and complications, patient follow-up, and patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Performance assessment with an appropriate model can identify deficiencies and failures of services provided in trauma centers. Understanding the current situation is one of the main requirements for designing any quality improvement programs.

Seven-year excess mortality, functional outcome and health status after trauma in Hong Kong

PURPOSE

The purpose was to investigate long-term health impacts of trauma and the aim was to describe the functional outcome and health status up to 7 years after trauma.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, multi-centre cohort study of adult trauma patients admitted to three regional trauma centres with moderate or major trauma (ISS ≥ 9) in Hong Kong (HK). Patients were followed up at regular time points (1, 6 months and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 years) by telephone using extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) and the Short-Form 36 (SF36). Observed annual mortality rate was compared with the expected mortality rate estimated using the HK population cohort. Linear mixed model (LMM) analyses examined the changes in SF36 with subgroups of age ≥ 65 years, ISS > 15, and GOSE ≥ 5 over time.

RESULTS

At 7 years, 115 patients had died and 48% (138/285) of the survivors responded. The annual mortality rate (AMR) of the trauma cohort was consistently higher than the expected mortality rate from the general population. Forty-one percent of respondents had upper good recovery (GOSE = 8) at 7 years. Seven-year mean PCS and MCS were 45.06 and 52.06, respectively. LMM showed PCS improved over time in patients aged < 65 years and with baseline GOSE ≥ 5, and the MCS improved over time with baseline GOSE ≥ 5. Higher mortality rate, limited functional recovery and worse physical health status persisted up to 7 years post-injury.

CONCLUSION

Long-term mortality and morbidity should be monitored for Asian trauma centre patients to understand the impact of trauma beyond hospital discharge.

RISC II is superior to TRISS in predicting 30-day mortality in blunt major trauma patients in Hong Kong

PURPOSE

Hong Kong (HK) trauma registries have been using the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) for audit and benchmarking since their introduction in 2000. We compare the mortality prediction model using TRISS and Revised Injury Severity Classification, version II (RISC II) for trauma centre patients in HK.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study with all five trauma centres in HK. Adult trauma patients with Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15 suffering from blunt injuries from January 2013 to December 2015 were included. TRISS models using the US and local coefficients were compared with the RISC II model. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for tested models.

RESULTS

1840 patients were included, of whom 1236/1840 (67%) were male. Median age was 59 years and median ISS was 25. Low falls were the most common mechanism of injury. The 30-day mortality was 23%. RISC II yielded a superior AUC of 0.896, compared with the TRISS models (MTOS: 0.848; PATOS: 0.839; HK: 0.858). Prespecified subgroup analyses showed that all the models performed worse for age ≥ 70, ASA ≥ III, and low falls. RISC II had a higher AUC compared with the TRISS models in all subgroups, although not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

RISC II was superior to TRISS in predicting the 30-day mortality for Hong Kong adult blunt major trauma patients. RISC II may be useful when performing future audit or benchmarking exercises for trauma in Hong Kong.

Trauma outcomes for blunt and penetrating injuries by mode of transportation and day/night shift

BACKGROUND

Effective management of trauma patients is dependent on pre-hospital triage systems and proper in-hospital treatment regardless of time of admission. We aim to investigate any differences in adjusted all-cause mortality between day vs. night arrival for adult trauma patients who were transported to the hospital via ground emergency medical services (GEMS) and helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) and to determine if care/outcomes are inferior when admitted during the night shift as compared to the day shift.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort analysis of adult blunt and penetrating injury patients requiring full team trauma activation at an American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACSCOT)-verified Level 1 trauma center from 2011 to 2019. Descriptive statistical analyses, chi-square analyses, independent-sample t-tests, and Fisher's exact tests were performed. Primary measurement outcome was adjusted observed/expected (O/E) mortality ratios utilizing TRISS methodology.

RESULTS

8370 patients with blunt injuries and 1216 patients with penetrating injuries were analyzed. There were no significant differences in day vs. night O/Es overall (blunt 0.65 vs. 0.59; p = 0.46) (penetrating 0.88 vs. 0.87; p = 0.97). There also were no significant differences when stratified by GEMS (blunt 0.64 vs. 0.55; p = 0.08) (penetrating 0.88 vs. 1.10; p = 0.09) and HEMS admissions (blunt 0.76 vs. 0.75; p = 0.91) (penetrating 0.88 vs. 0.91; p = 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

At an ACSCOT-verified Level 1 Trauma Center, care/outcomes of patients admitted during the night shift were not inferior to those admitted during the day shift. Trauma Center verification by the ACSCOT and multidisciplinary collaboration may allow for consistent care despite injury type and time of day.

Indicators to measure prehospital care quality: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this scoping review was to locate, examine and describe the literature on indicators used to measure prehospital care quality.

INTRODUCTION

The performance of ambulance services and quality of prehospital care has traditionally been measured using simple indicators, such as response time intervals, based on low-level evidence. The discipline of paramedicine has evolved significantly over the last few decades. Consequently, the validity of utilizing such measures as holistic prehospital care quality indicators (QIs) has been challenged. There is growing interest in finding new and more significant ways to measure prehospital care quality.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review examined the concepts of prehospital care quality and QIs developed for ambulance services. This review considered primary and secondary research in any paradigm and utilizing any methods, as well as text and opinion research.

METHODS

Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for conducting scoping reviews was employed. Separate searches were conducted for two review questions; review question 1 addressed the definition of prehospital care quality and review question 2 addressed characteristics of QIs in the context of prehospital care. The following databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. The searches were limited to publications from January 1, 2000 to the day of the search (April 16, 2017). Non-English articles were excluded. To supplement the above, searches for gray literature were performed, experts in the field of study were consulted and applicable websites were perused.

RESULTS

Review question 1: Nine articles were included. These originated mostly from England (n = 3, 33.3%) and the USA (n = 3, 33.3%). Only one study specifically aimed at defining prehospital care quality. Five articles (55.5%) described attributes specific to prehospital care quality and four (44.4%) articles considered generic healthcare quality attributes to be applicable to the prehospital context. A total of 17 attributes were identified. The most common attributes were Clinical effectiveness (n = 17, 100%), Efficiency (n = 7, 77.8%), Equitability (n = 7, 77.8%) and Safety (n = 6, 66.7%). Timeliness and Accessibility were referred to by four and three (44.4% and 33.3%) articles, respectively.Review question 2: Thirty articles were included. The predominant source of articles was research literature (n = 23; 76.7%) originating mostly from the USA (n = 13; 43.3%). The most frequently applied QI development method was a form of consensus process (n = 15; 50%). A total of 526 QIs were identified. Of these, 283 (53.8%) were categorized as Clinical and 243 (46.2%) as System/Organizational QIs. Within these categories respectively, QIs related to Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (n = 57; 10.8%) and Time intervals (n = 75; 14.3%) contributed the most. The most commonly addressed prehospital care quality attributes were Appropriateness (n = 250, 47.5%), Clinical effectiveness (n = 174, 33.1%) and Accessibility (n = 124, 23.6%). Most QIs were process indicators (n = 386, 73.4%).

CONCLUSION

Whilst there is paucity in research aiming to specifically define prehospital care quality, the attributes of generic healthcare quality definitions appear to be accepted and applicable to the prehospital context. There is growing interest in developing prehospital care QIs. However, there is a need for validation of existing QIs and de novo development addressing broader aspects of prehospital care.

Quality Indicators for Evaluating Prehospital Emergency Care: A Scoping Review

Introduction Historically, the quality and performance of prehospital emergency care (PEC) has been assessed largely based on surrogate, non-clinical endpoints such as response time intervals or other crude measures of care (eg, stakeholder satisfaction). However, advances in Emergency Medical Services (EMS) systems and services world-wide have seen their scope and reach continue to expand. This has dictated that novel measures of performance be implemented to compliment this growth. Significant progress has been made in this area, largely in the form of the development of evidence-informed quality indicators (QIs) of PEC. Problem Quality indicators represent an increasingly popular component of health care quality and performance measurement. However, little is known about the development of QIs in the PEC environment. The purpose of this study was to assess the development and characteristics of PEC-specific QIs in the literature.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted through a search of PubMed (National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Institutes of Health; Bethesda, Maryland USA); EMBase (Elsevier; Amsterdam, Netherlands); CINAHL (EBSCO Information Services; Ipswich, Massachusetts USA); Web of Science (Thomson Reuters; New York, New York USA); and the Cochrane Library (The Cochrane Collaboration; Oxford, United Kingdom). To increase the sensitivity of the literature, a search of the grey literature and review of select websites was additionally conducted. Articles were selected that proposed at least one PEC QI and whose aim was to discuss, analyze, or promote quality measurement in the PEC environment.

RESULTS

The majority of research (n=25 articles) was published within the last decade (68.0%) and largely originated within the USA (68.0%). Delphi and observational methodologies were the most commonly employed for QI development (28.0%). A total of 331 QIs were identified via the article review, with an additional 15 QIs identified via the website review. Of all, 42.8% were categorized as primarily Clinical, with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest contributing the highest number within this domain (30.4%). Of the QIs categorized as Non-Clinical (57.2%), Time-Based Intervals contributed the greatest number (28.8%). Population on Whom the Data Collection was Constructed made up the most commonly reported QI component (79.8%), followed by a Descriptive Statement (63.6%). Least reported were Timing of Data Collection (12.1%) and Timing of Reporting (12.1%). Pilot testing of the QIs was reported on 34.7% of QIs identified in the review.

CONCLUSION

Overall, there is considerable interest in the understanding and development of PEC quality measurement. However, closer attention to the details and reporting of QIs is required for research of this type to be more easily extrapolated and generalized. Howard I , Cameron P , Wallis L , Castren M , Lindstrom V . Quality indicators for evaluating prehospital emergency care: a scoping review. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(1):43-52.

The association of patient and trauma characteristics with the health-related quality of life in a Dutch trauma population

Background

It is suggested in literature to use the Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) as an outcome indicator for evaluating trauma centre performances. In order to predict HRQoL, characteristics that could be of influence on a predictive model should be identified. This study identifies patient and injury characteristics associated with the HRQoL in a general trauma population.

Methods

Retrospective study of trauma patients admitted from 1st January 2007 through 31th December 2012. Patients were aged ≥18 years and discharged alive from the level I trauma centre. A combined health survey (SF-36 and EQ-5D) was sent to all traceable patients. The subdomain outcomes and EQ-5D index value (EQ-5Di) were compared with the reference population. A linear regression analysis was performed to identify parameters associated parameters with the HRQoL outcome.

Results

A total of 1870 patients were included for analyses. Compared to the eligible population, included patients were significantly older, more severely injured, more often admitted in the ICU and had a longer admission duration.

The SF-36 and EQ-5Di were significantly lower compared to the Dutch reference population.

The variables age, Injury Severity Score, hospital length of stay, ICU length of stay, Revised Trauma Score, probability of survival, and severe injury to the head and extremities were associated with the HRQoL in the majority of the subdomains.

Discussion

In order to use HRQoL as an indicator for trauma centre performances, there should be a consensus of the ideal timing for the measurement of HRQoL post-injury and the appropriate HRQoL instrument. Furthermore, standardised HRQoL outcomes must be developed.

Conclusion

This study revealed eight factors (described above) which could be used to predict the HRQoL in trauma patients.

"Delay to operating room" fails to identify adverse outcomes at a Level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma devised process audit filters to identify opportunities for improvement (OFI), prevent adverse outcomes, and improve quality. Delay to the operating room for primary trauma laparotomy is a process audit filter that has not been definitively associated with improved outcomes. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of delay to the operating room of greater than 2 hours (DOR) to independently identify an adverse outcome or an OFI at our Level I trauma center.

METHODS

Trauma patients who underwent primary exploratory laparotomy from July 2006 to March 2015 were reviewed. Those with DOR were identified and compared with those without DOR. To analyze the ability of DOR to independently identify an adverse outcome or an OFI, DOR patients were further divided into those with isolated DOR and those with DOR in conjunction with one or more other process audit filter. Primary outcome was the presence of a complication. Secondary outcome was an identified OFI. Medical records of patients with either outcome were reviewed to determine if the outcome resulted directly from DOR.

RESULTS

Of 472 patients, 109 (23%) had DOR and 363 (77%) did not. There were no significant differences in age, sex, or injury severity between the two groups. The rates of complications among DOR patients and those without DOR were not significantly different (35% vs. 38%, p = 0.59). The DOR was the only process audit filter flagged in 31(28%) patients in the DOR group. This subgroup had no identified complications but incurred two OFIs; neither OFI was associated with an adverse outcome.

CONCLUSION

In trauma patients undergoing primary exploratory laparotomy, DOR fails to independently identify adverse outcomes. These findings suggest that DOR, as a routinely collected process audit filter, is not an effective indicator of suboptimal care or adverse outcomes at a Level I trauma center.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, level IV; prognostic study, level III.

Age-related injury patterns in Spanish trauma ICU patients. Results from the RETRAUCI

BACKGROUND

Injury patterns may differ in trauma patients when age is considered. This information is relevant in the management of trauma patients and for planning preventive measures.

METHODS

We included in the study all patients admitted for traumatic disease in the participating ICUs from November 23^rd, 2012 to July 31^st, 2015 with complete records. Data on epidemiology, injury patterns, severity scores, acute management, resources utilisation and outcome were recorded and compared in the following groups of age: ≤55years (young adults), 56-65 years (adults), 66-75 years (elderly), >75years (very elderly). Quantitative data were reported as median (Interquartile Range (IQR) 25-75) and categorical data as number and percentage. Comparison between groups of age with quantitative variables was performed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) test. Differences between groups with categorical variables were compared using the chi-square test. A value of p<0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

We included 2700 patients (78.9% male). Median age was 46 (31-62) years. Blunt trauma was present in 93.7% of the patients. Median RTS was 7.55 (5.97-7.84). Median ISS was 20 (13-26). High-energy trauma secondary to motor-vehicle accident with rhabdomyolysis and drugs abuse showed an inverse linear association with ageing, whilst pedestrian falls with isolated brain injury, being run-over and pre-injury antiplatelets or anticoagulant treatment increased with age (in all cases p<0.001). Multiple injuries were more common in young adults (p<0.001). Acute kidney injury prevalence was higher in elderly and very elderly patients (p<0.001). ICU Mortality increased with age in spite of similar severity scores in all groups (p<0.001). The main cause of death in all groups was intracranial hypertension.

CONCLUSIONS

Different injury patterns exist in relation with ageing in trauma ICU patients. Adult patients were more likely to present high-energy trauma with significant injuries in different areas whilst elderly patients were prone to low-energy falls, complicated by antiplatelets or anticoagulants use, resulting in severe brain injury and increased mortality.

District-level hospital trauma care audit filters: Delphi technique for defining context-appropriate indicators for quality improvement initiative evaluation in developing countries

INTRODUCTION

Prospective clinical audit of trauma care improves outcomes for the injured in high-income countries (HICs). However, equivalent, context-appropriate audit filters for use in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) district-level hospitals have not been well established. We aimed to develop context-appropriate trauma care audit filters for district-level hospitals in Ghana, was well as other LMICs more broadly.

METHODS

Consensus on trauma care audit filters was built between twenty panellists using a Delphi technique with four anonymous, iterative surveys designed to elicit: (i) trauma care processes to be measured; (ii) important features of audit filters for the district-level hospital setting; and (iii) potentially useful filters. Filters were ranked on a scale from 0 to 10 (10 being very useful). Consensus was measured with average percent majority opinion (APMO) cut-off rate. Target consensus was defined a priori as: a median rank of ≥9 for each filter and an APMO cut-off rate of ≥0.8.

RESULTS

Panellists agreed on trauma care processes to target (e.g. triage, phases of trauma assessment, early referral if needed) and specific features of filters for district-level hospital use (e.g. simplicity, unassuming of resource capacity). APMO cut-off rate increased successively: Round 1--0.58; Round 2--0.66; Round 3--0.76; and Round 4--0.82. After Round 4, target consensus on 22 trauma care and referral-specific filters was reached. Example filters include: triage--vital signs are recorded within 15 min of arrival (must include breathing assessment, heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation if available); circulation--a large bore IV was placed within 15 min of patient arrival; referral--if referral is activated, the referring clinician and receiving facility communicate by phone or radio prior to transfer.

CONCLUSION

This study proposes trauma care audit filters appropriate for LMIC district-level hospitals. Given the successes of similar filters in HICs and obstetric care filters in LMICs, the collection and reporting of prospective trauma care audit filters may be an important step towards improving care for the injured at district-level hospitals in LMICs.

Epidemiology of severe trauma in Spain. Registry of trauma in the ICU (RETRAUCI). Pilot phase

OBJECTIVE

To describe the characteristics and management of severe trauma disease in Spanish Intensive Care Units (ICUs). Registry of trauma in the ICU (RETRAUCI). Pilot phase.

DESIGN

A prospective, multicenter registry.

SETTING

Thirteen Spanish ICUs.

PATIENTS

Patients with trauma disease admitted to the ICU.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

Epidemiology, out-of-hospital attention, registry of injuries, resources utilization, complications and outcome were evaluated.

RESULTS

Patients, n=2242. Mean age 47.1±19.02 years. Males 79%. Blunt trauma 93.9%. Injury Severity Score 22.2±12.1, Revised Trauma Score 6.7±1.6. Non-intentional in 84.4% of the cases. The most common causes of trauma were traffic accidents followed by pedestrian and high-energy falls. Up to 12.4% were taking antiplatelet medication or anticoagulants. Almost 28% had a suspected or confirmed toxic influence in trauma. Up to 31.5% required an out-of-hospital artificial airway. The time from trauma to ICU admission was 4.7±5.3hours. At ICU admission, 68.5% were hemodynamically stable. Brain and chest injuries predominated. A large number of complications were documented. Mechanical ventilation was used in 69.5% of the patients (mean 8.2±9.9 days), of which 24.9% finally required a tracheostomy. The median duration of stay in the ICU and in hospital was 5 (range 3-13) and 9 (5-19) days, respectively. The ICU mortality rate was 12.3%, while the in-hospital mortality rate was 16.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

The pilot phase of the RETRAUCI offers a first impression of the epidemiology and management of trauma disease in Spanish ICUs.

Review article: what makes a good healthcare quality indicator? A systematic review and validation study

Indicators measuring aspects of performance to assess quality of care are often chosen arbitrarily. The present study aimed to determine what should be considered when selecting healthcare quality indicators, particularly focusing on the application to emergency medicine. Structured searches of electronic databases were supplemented by website searches of quality of care and benchmarking organisations, citation searches and discussions with experts. Candidate attributes of 'good' healthcare indicators were extracted independently by two authors. The validity of each attribute was independently assessed by 16 experts in quality of care and emergency medicine. Valid and reliable attributes were included in a critical appraisal tool for healthcare quality indicators, which was piloted by emergency medicine specialists. Twenty-three attributes were identified, and all were rated moderate to extremely important by an expert panel. The reliability was high: alpha = 0.98. Twelve existing tools explicitly stated a median (range) of 14 (8-17) attributes. A critical appraisal tool incorporating all the attributes was developed. This was piloted by four emergency medicine specialists who were asked to appraise and rank a set of six candidate indicators. Although using the tool took more time than implicit gestalt decision making: median (interquartile range) 190 (43-352) min versus 17.5 (3-34) min, their rankings changed after using the tool. To inform the appraisal of quality improvement indicators for emergency medicine, a comprehensive list of indicator attributes was identified, validated, developed into a tool and piloted. Although expert consensus is still required, this tool provides an explicit basis for discussions around indicator selection.

Trauma center performance indicators for nonfatal outcomes: a scoping review of the literature

BACKGROUND

According to Donabedian's framework, outcomes covering the following six domains should be used to evaluate health care quality: death, adverse events, readmissions to hospital, resource use, quality of life, and ability to function in daily activities. The objective of this study was to identify the nonfatal outcomes that have been used to evaluate the performance of trauma hospitals. Secondary objectives were to describe definitions and methodological quality.

METHODS

We performed a scoping literature review of studies using at least one nonfatal outcome to evaluate the performance of acute care hospitals for the treatment of general trauma populations. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane central, CINAHL, BIOSIS, TRIP and ProQuest databases. Methodological quality was evaluated using elements of the STROBE statement and the Downs and Black tool.

RESULTS

Of 14,521 citations, 40 were eligible for inclusion. We identified 14 nonfatal outcomes as follows: (i) adverse events including complications (used in 35 evaluations), missed injuries (n = 4), reintubation (n = 2), unplanned intensive care unit admissions (n = 2), and unplanned surgeries (n = 4); (ii) resource use including hospital (n = 19), intensive care unit (n = 15), and ventilator (n = 4) length of stay, inappropriate hospital stay (n = 1), and potentially unnecessary care (n = 1); (iii) hospital readmissions (n = 4); and (iv) ability to function in daily activities including functional capacity (n = 2), and discharge destination (n = 3). No measures of quality of life were identified. There was high heterogeneity in the definitions used. Only 18% of studies had high methodological quality.

CONCLUSION

Among recommended domains of nonfatal outcomes, adverse events and resource use were frequently used to evaluate trauma care, readmissions and function in daily activities were rarely used, and quality of life was never used. In addition, definitions of nonfatal outcomes were variable, and methodological quality was low. There is a need to develop valid and reliable performance indicators based on each domain of Donabedian's framework to evaluate trauma care.

[Trauma registries: a health priority, a strategic project for the SEMICYUC]

The most efficient approach to traumatologic disease is prevention, but physicians also must supervise care of the victims. An operational and effective trauma registry requires financial support, adequate software, a well-defined population, personnel committed to training, and a detailed process for data collection, reporting, validation and the maintenance of confidentiality. Above all, however, motivation is required. Registries can offer many benefits in relation to these highly prevalent disorders, with an impact in terms of health promotion and even advantages in the form of cost reductions, as well as relief from the suffering caused by trauma (mortality, disability)-contributing to improve the efficiency and quality of critical trauma care. The SEMICYUC has demonstrated its ability to establish and maintain records of national interest, and this should become a priority project.

Developing process guidelines for trauma care in the Netherlands for severely injured patients: results from a Delphi study

BACKGROUND

In organised trauma systems the process of care is the key to quality. Nevertheless, the optimal process of trauma care remains unclear due to lack of or inconclusive evidence. Because monitoring and improving the performance of a trauma system is complex, this study aimed to develop consensus-based process guidelines for trauma care in the Netherlands for severely injured patients.

METHODS

A five-round Delphi study was conducted with 141 participants that represent all professions involved in trauma care. Sensitivity analyses were carried out to evaluate whether consensus extended across all professions and to detect possible bias.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 21 guidelines within 4 categories: timeliness, actions, competent teams and interdisciplinary process. Timeliness guidelines set specific critical limits and definitions for 10 time intervals in the time period from an emergency call until the patient leaves the trauma room. Action guidelines reflect aspects of appropriate care and strongly rely on the international Advanced Trauma Life Support principles. Competence guidelines include flow charts to assess the competence of prehospital and emergency department teams. Essential to competent teams are education and experience of all team members. The interdisciplinary process guideline focuses on cooperation, communication and feedback within and between all professions involved. Consensus was extended across all professions and no bias was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

In this Delphi study, a large expert panel agreed on a set of guidelines describing the optimal process of care for severely injured trauma patients in the Netherlands. In addition to time intervals and appropriate actions, these guidelines emphasise the importance of team competence and interdisciplinary processes in trauma care. The guidelines can be seen as a description of a best practice and a new field standard in the Netherlands. The next step is to implement the guidelines and monitor the performance of the Dutch trauma system based on the guidelines.

Quality care in pediatric trauma

Infrastructure, processes of care and outcome measurements are the cornerstone of quality care for pediatric trauma. This review aims to evaluate current evidence on system organization and concentration of pediatric expertise in the delivery of pediatric trauma care. It discusses key quality indicators for all phases of care, from pre-hospital to post-discharge recovery. In particular, it highlights the importance of measuring quality of life and psychosocial recovery for the injured child.

Quality indicators used by trauma centers for performance measurement

BACKGROUND

To describe the quality indicators (QIs) that trauma centers use for quality measurement and performance improvement. Measuring and reporting quality of care is a critical step to improve the quality of care. QIs compare actual trauma care against ideal criteria and identify patients in whom care may have been suboptimal and should be further reviewed.

METHODS

Three hundred thirty verified trauma centers in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand had their websites reviewed and leadership surveyed regarding QI use. The indicators identified were classified according to definition specifications, phase of care, Institute of Medicine aims, and contents.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-one centers responded to the survey (76%) and the majority (97%) indicated that they use QIs. We obtained 10,587 QIs from 262 centers (survey responses and website review) of which 1,102 were unique indicators. The QIs primarily assessed the safety (49%), effectiveness (32%), efficiency (27%), and timeliness (22%) of hospital processes (64%) and outcomes (24%). The majority of indicators were used by a small number of centers (551 of 1,102 unique indicators used by single centers).

CONCLUSION

Our study provides the first description of the QIs used by verified trauma centers in four high-income countries with similar systems of trauma care. The majority of trauma centers measure QIs designed to examine the safety, effectiveness, efficiency, and timeliness of hospital processes and outcomes. Opportunities exist to standardize existing QIs to allow broader implementation and develop new QIs to examine patient-centered care and equality of care.

Implementing performance improvement in New Zealand emergency departments: the six hour time target policy national research project protocol

BACKGROUND

In May 2009, the New Zealand government announced a new policy aimed at improving the quality of Emergency Department care and whole hospital performance. Governments have increasingly looked to time targets as a mechanism for improving hospital performance and from a whole system perspective, using the Emergency Department waiting time as a performance measure has the potential to see improvements in the wider health system. However, the imposition of targets may have significant adverse consequences. There is little empirical work examining how the performance of the wider hospital system is affected by such a target. This project aims to answer the following questions: How has the introduction of the target affected broader hospital performance over time, and what accounts for these changes? Which initiatives and strategies have been successful in moving hospitals towards the target without compromising the quality of other care processes and patient outcomes? Is there a difference in outcomes between different ethnic and age groups? Which initiatives and strategies have the greatest potential to be transferred across organisational contexts?

METHODS/DESIGN

The study design is mixed methods; combining qualitative research into the behaviour and practices of specific case study hospitals with quantitative data on clinical outcomes and process measures of performance over the period 2006-2012. All research activity is guided by a Kaupapa Māori Research methodological approach. A dynamic systems model of acute patient flows was created to frame the study. Consequences of the target (positive and negative) will be explored by integrating analyses and insights gained from the quantitative and qualitative streams of the study.

DISCUSSION

At the time of submission of this protocol, the project has been underway for 12 months. This time was necessary to finalise both the case study sites and the secondary outcomes through key stakeholder consultation. We believe that this is an appropriate juncture to publish the protocol, now that the sites and final outcomes to be measured have been determined.

Injury in China: a systematic review of injury surveillance studies conducted in Chinese hospital emergency departments

BACKGROUND

Injuries represent a significant and growing public health concern in China. This Review was conducted to document the characteristics of injured patients presenting to the emergency department of Chinese hospitals and to assess of the nature of information collected and reported in published surveillance studies.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE and China Academic Journals supplemented with a hand search of journals was performed. Studies published in the period 1997 to 2007 were included and research published in Chinese was the focus. Search terms included emergency, injury, medical care.

RESULTS

Of the 268 studies identified, 13 were injury surveillance studies set in the emergency department. Nine were collaborative studies of which eight were prospective studies. Of the five single centre studies only one was of a prospective design. Transport, falls and industrial injuries were common mechanisms of injury. Study strengths were large patient sample sizes and for the collaborative studies a large number of participating hospitals. There was however limited use of internationally recognised injury classification and severity coding indices.

CONCLUSION

Despite the limited number of studies identified, the scope of each highlights the willingness and the capacity to conduct surveillance studies in the emergency department. This Review highlights the need for the adoption of standardized injury coding indices in the collection and reporting of patient health data. While high level injury surveillance systems focus on population-based priority setting, this Review demonstrates the need to establish an internationally comparable trauma registry that would permit monitoring of the trauma system and would by extension facilitate the optimal care of the injured patient through the development of informed quality assurance programs and the implementation of evidence-based health policy.

Lack of emergency medical services documentation is associated with poor patient outcomes: a validation of audit filters for prehospital trauma care

BACKGROUND

Our previous Delphi study identified several audit filters considered sensitive to deviations in prehospital trauma care and potentially useful in conducting performance improvement, a process currently recommended by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma. This study validates 2 of those proposed audit filters.

STUDY DESIGN

We studied 4,744 trauma patients using the electronic records of the Central Region Trauma registry and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) patient logs for the period January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2004. We studied whether requests by on-scene Basic Life Support (BLS) for Advanced Life Support (ALS) assistance or failure by EMS personnel to record basic patient physiology at the scene was associated with increased in-hospital mortality. We performed multivariate analyses, including a propensity score quintile approach, adjusting for differences in case mix and clustering by hospital.

RESULTS

Overall mortality was 6.1%. A total of 28.2% (n = 1,337) of EMS records were missing patient scene physiologic data. Multivariate analysis revealed that patients missing 1 or more measures of patient physiology at the scene had increased risk of death (adjusted odds ratio = 2.15; 95% CI, 1.13 to 4.10). In 17.4% (n = 402) of cases BLS requested ALS assistance. Patients for whom BLS requested ALS had a similar risk of death as patients for whom ALS was initially dispatched (odds ratio = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.51 to 2.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Failure of EMS to document basic measures of scene physiology is associated with increased mortality. This deviation in care can serve as a sensitive audit filter for performance improvement. The need by BLS for ALS assistance was not associated with increased mortality.

Audit filters for improving processes of care and clinical outcomes in trauma systems

BACKGROUND

Traumatic injuries represent a considerable public health burden with significant personal and societal costs. The care of the severely injured patient in a trauma system progresses along a continuum that includes numerous interventions being provided by a multidisciplinary group of healthcare personnel. Despite the recent emphasis on quality of care in medicine, there has been little research to direct trauma clinicians and administrators on how optimally to monitor and improve upon the quality of care delivered within a trauma system. Audit filters are one mechanism for improving quality of care and are defined as specific clinical processes or outcomes of care that, when they occur, represent unfavorable deviations from an established norm and which prompt review and feedback. Although audit filters are widely utilized for performance improvement in trauma systems they have not been subjected to systematic review of their effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of using audit filters for improving processes of care and clinical outcomes in trauma systems.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Our search strategy included an electronic search of the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane EPOC Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 4), MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ISI Web of Science: (SCI-EXPANDED and CPCI-S). We handsearched the Journal of Trauma, Injury, Annals of Emergency Medicine, Academic Emergency Medicine, and Injury Prevention. We searched two clinical trial registries: 1) The World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and, 2) Clinical Trials.gov. We also contacted content experts for further articles. The most recent electronic search was completed in December 2008 and the handsearch was completed up to February 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, controlled before-and-after studies, and interrupted time series studies that used audit filters as an intervention for improving processes of care, morbidity, or mortality for severely injured patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened the search results, applied inclusion criteria, and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

There were no studies identified that met the inclusion criteria for this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We were unable to identify any studies of sufficient methodological quality to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of audit filters as a performance improvement intervention in trauma systems. Future research using rigorous study designs should focus on the relative effectiveness of audit filters in comparison to alternative quality improvement strategies at improving processes of care, functional outcomes, and mortality for injured patients.

The trauma risk adjustment model: a new model for evaluating trauma care

BACKGROUND DATA

The trauma injury severity score (TRISS) has been used for over 20 years for retrospective risk assessment in trauma populations. The TRISS has serious limitations, which may compromise the validity of trauma care evaluations.

OBJECTIVE

To derive and validate a new mortality prediction model, the trauma risk adjustment model (TRAM), and to compare the performance of the TRAM to that of the TRISS in terms of predictive validity and risk adjustment.

METHODS

The Quebec Trauma Registry (1998-2005), based on the mandatory participation of 59 designated provincial trauma centers, was used to derive the model. The American National Trauma Data Bank (2000-2005), based on the voluntary participation of any US hospitals treating trauma, was used for the validation phase. Adult patients with blunt trauma respecting at least one of the following criteria were included: hospital stay >2 days, intensive care unit admission, death, or hospital transfer. Hospital mortality was modeled with logistic generalized additive models using cubic smoothing splines to accommodate nonlinear relations to mortality. Predictive validity was assessed with model discrimination and calibration. Risk adjustment was assessed using comparisons of risk-adjusted mortality between hospitals.

RESULTS

The TRAM generated an area under the receiving operator curve of 0.944 and a Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic of 42 in the derivation phase. In the validation phase, the TRAM demonstrated better model discrimination and calibration than the TRISS (area under the receiving operator curve = 0.942 and 0.928, P < 0.001; Hosmer-Lemeshow statistics = 127 and 256, respectively). Replacing the TRISS with the TRAM led to a mean change of 28% in hospital risk-adjusted odds ratios of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that adopting the TRAM could improve the validity of trauma care evaluations and trauma outcome research.

The challenges of developing a trauma system for Indigenous people

Trauma systems have been shown to provide the best trauma care for injured patients. A trauma system developed for Indigenous people should take into account many factors including geographical remoteness and cultural diversity. Indigenous people suffer from a significant intentional and non-intentional burden of injury, often greater than non-Indigenous populations, and a public health approach in dealing with trauma can be adopted. This includes transport issues, prevention and control of intentional violence, cultural sensitization of health providers, community emergency responses, community rehabilitation and improving resilience. The ultimate aim is to decrease the trauma burden through a trauma system with which indigenous people can fully identify.

Are the ACSCOT filters associated with outcome? Examining morbidity and mortality in a European setting

INTRODUCTION

Quality indicators are widely needed for external assessment and comparison of trauma care. It is common to extend the use of the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACSCOT) audit filters to this scope. This mandates that their actual link with outcome be demonstrated. Several studies attempted to do so, but with inconsistent risk-adjustment, conflicting results and never using long-term disability as outcome measure, despite its recognised importance. We tried to overcome these limitations.

METHODS

Risk-adjusted analysis of the association of filters 1, 3, 10 and 13 with 30-day mortality and 6-month disability measured with the EQ5D scale. Multivariate logistic and linear regression models were used respectively. The data came from a National Italian Trauma Registry comprising 838 patients with major trauma.

RESULTS

Three (1, 3 and 10) of the filters analysed did not show any significant association with either outcome. Filter 13 was associated with decreased mortality and lower (worse) disability scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Methodological difficulties, incomplete, obsolete or non-generalizable definitions of some filters can explain the generally poor correlation with outcomes. The conflicting association of filter 13 with the two types of outcomes raises some interesting questions about the targeted outcomes in trauma research. It is recommended that further studies develop better quality indicators and test their link with both survival and functional outcome in the same setting where they are applied for assessment and comparison of trauma care.