Abstract
Abstract
Background
Trauma is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Morbidity and mortality review of selected patient cases is used to improve the quality of trauma care by identifying opportunities for improvement (OFI). The aim of this study was to assess how patient and process factors are associated with OFI in trauma care.
Methods
We conducted a registry-based study using all patients between 2017 and 2021 from the Karolinska University Hospital who had been reviewed regarding the presence of OFI as defined by a morbidity and mortality conference. We used bi- and multivariable logistic regression to assess the associations between the following patient and process factors and OFI: age, sex, respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), Injury Severity Score (ISS), survival at 30 days, highest hospital care level, arrival on working hours, arrival on weekends, intubation status and time to first computed tomography (CT).
Results
OFI was identified in 300 (5.8%) out of 5182 patients. Age, missing Glasgow Coma Scale, time to first CT, highest hospital care level and ISS were statistically significantly associated with OFI.
Conclusion
Several patient and process factors were found to be associated with OFI, indicating that patients with moderate to severe trauma and those with delays to first CT are at the highest odds of OFI.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine,Emergency Medicine
Reference25 articles.
1. Daniels David S, Roy N, Solomon H, Stålsby Lundborg C, Gerdin Wärnberg M. Measuring post-discharge socioeconomic and quality of life outcomes in trauma patients: A scoping review. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes [Internet]. Springer Science; Business Media LLC; 2021; 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-021-00346-6.
2. Corso P, Finkelstein E, Miller T, Fiebelkorn I, Zaloshnja E. Incidence and lifetime costs of injuries in the United States. Injury Prevention [Internet]. BMJ; 2015; 21: 434–440. https://doi.org/10.1136/ip.2005.010983rep.
3. James SL, Castle CD, Dingels ZV, Fox JT, Hamilton EB, Liu Z et al. Estimating global injuries morbidity and mortality: methods and data used in the Global Burden of Disease 2017 study. Injury Prevention [Internet]. BMJ; 2020; 26: i125–i153. https://doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2019-043531.
4. Murray CJ, Lopez AD, Organization WH, et al. The global burden of Disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from Diseases, injuries, and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020: summary. World Health Organization; 1996.
5. Haagsma JA et al. The global burden of injury: incidence, mortality, disability-adjusted life years and time trends from the Global Burden of Disease study 2013. Injury Prevention [Internet]. BMJ; 2015; 22: 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2015-041616.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献