Dataset Information

Prehospital trauma death review in the State of Victoria, Australia: a study protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Regionalised trauma systems have been shown to improve outcomes for trauma patients. However, the evaluation of these trauma systems has been oriented towards in-hospital care. Therefore, the epidemiology and care delivered to the injured patients who died in the prehospital setting remain poorly studied. This study aims to provide an overview of a methodological approach to reviewing trauma deaths in order to assess the preventability, identify areas for improvements in the system of care provided to these patients and evaluate the potential for novel interventions to improve outcomes for seriously injured trauma patients.

Methods and analysis

The planned study is a retrospective review of prehospital and early in-hospital (<24 hours) deaths following traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest that were attended by Ambulance Victoria between 2008 and 2014. Eligible patients will be identified from the Victorian Ambulance Cardiac Arrest Registry and linked with the National Coronial Information System. For patients who were transported to hospital, data will be linked the Victoria State Trauma Registry. The project will be undertaken in four phases: (1) survivability assessment; (2) preventability assessment; (3) identification of potential areas for improvement; and (4) identification of potentially useful novel technologies. Survivability assessment will be based on predetermined anatomical injuries considered unsurvivable. For patients with potentially survivable injuries, multidisciplinary expert panel reviews will be conducted to assess the preventability as well as the identification of potential areas for improvement and the utility of novel technologies.

Ethics and dissemination

The present study was approved by the Victorian Department of Justice and Regulation HREC (CF/16/272) and the Monash University HREC (CF16/532 - 2016000259). Results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and reports provided to Ambulance Victoria, the Victorian State Trauma Committee and the Victorian State Government Department of Health and Human Services.

SUBMITTER: Mercier E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6067343 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA wide range of outcome measures can be calculated for hospital-treated injury patients. These include mortality, use of critical care services, complications, length of stay, treatment costs, readmission and nursing care after discharge. Each address different aspects and phases of injury recovery and can yield vastly different results. This study aims to: (1) measure and report this range of outcomes in hospital-treated injury patients in a defined population; and (2) describe the associations between injury characteristics, socio-demographics and comorbidities and the various outcomes.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted of injury-related hospital admissions from July 2012 to June 2014 (152,835 patients) in Victoria, Australia. The admission records were linked within the dataset, enabling follow-up, to assess the outcomes of in-hospital death, burden, complications and 30-day readmissions. Associations between factors and outcomes were determined using univariate regression analysis.ResultsThe proportion of patients who died in hospital was 0.9%, while 26.8% needed post-discharge care. On average patients had 2.4 complications (confidence interval (CI) 2.4-2.5) related to their initial injury, the mean cost of treating a patient was Australian dollars 7013 (CI 6929-7096) and the median length of stay was one day (inter quartile range 1-3). Intensive-care-unit-stay was recorded in 3% of the patients. All-cause 30-day readmissions occurred in 12.3%, non-planned 30-day readmissions in 7.9%, while potentially avoidable 30-day readmissions were observed in 3.2% of the patients. Increasing age was associated with all outcomes. The need for care post-discharge from hospital was highest among children and the oldest age group (85 years and over). Injury severity was associated with all adverse outcomes. Increasing number of comorbidities increased the likelihood of all outcomes. Overall, outcomes are shown to differ by age, gender, comorbidities, body region injured, injury type and injury severity, and to a lesser extent by socio-economic areas.ConclusionsOutcomes and risk factors differ depending on the outcome measured, and the method used for measuring the outcome. Similar outcomes measured in different ways produces varying results. Data linkage has provided a valuable platform for a comprehensive overview of outcomes, which can help design and target secondary and tertiary preventive measures.

Project description:BackgroundConcerns have been raised in Australia and internationally regarding the quality and effectiveness of hospital postnatal care, although Australian women receiving postnatal care in the private maternity sector rate their satisfaction with care more highly than women receiving public maternity care. In Victoria, Australia, two-thirds of women receive their maternity care in the public sector and the remainder in private health care sector. A statewide review of public hospital postnatal care in Victoria from the perspective of care providers found many barriers to care provision including the busyness of postnatal wards, inadequate staffing and priority being given to other episodes of care; however the study did not include private hospitals. The aim of this study was replicate the review in the private sector, to explore the structure and organisation of postnatal care in private hospitals and identify those aspects of care potentially impacting on women's experiences and maternal and infant care. This provides a more complete overview of the organisational structures and processes in postnatal care in all Victorian hospitals from the perspective of care providers.MethodsA mixed method design was used. A structured postal survey was sent to all Victorian private hospitals (n = 19) and key informant interviews were undertaken with selected clinical midwives, maternity unit managers and obstetricians (n = 11). Survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics and interview data analysed thematically.ResultsPrivate hospital care providers report that postnatal care is provided in very busy environments, and that meeting the aims of postnatal care (breastfeeding support, education of parents and facilitating rest and recovery for women following birth) was difficult in the context of increased acuity of postnatal care; prioritising of other areas over postnatal care; high midwife-to-woman ratios; and the number and frequency of visitors. These findings were similar to the public review. Organisational differences in postnatal care were found between the two sectors: private hospitals are more likely to have a separate postnatal care unit with single rooms and can accommodate partners' over-night; very few have a policy of infant rooming-in; and most have well-baby nurseries. Private hospitals are also more likely to employ staff other than midwives, have fewer core postnatal staff and have a greater dependence on casual and bank staff to provide postnatal care.ConclusionsThere are similarities and differences in the organisation and provision of private postnatal care compared to postnatal care in public hospitals. Key differences between the two sectors relate to the organisational and aesthetic aspects of service provision rather than the delivery of postnatal care. The key messages emerging from both reviews is the need to review and monitor the adequacy of staffing levels and to develop alternative approaches to postnatal care to improve this episode of care for women and care providers alike. We also recommend further research to provide a greater evidence-base for postnatal care provision.

Project description:IntroductionHaemorrhage causes most preventable prehospital trauma deaths and about a third of in-hospital trauma deaths. Tranexamic acid (TXA), administered soon after hospital arrival in certain trauma systems, is an effective therapy in preventing or managing acute traumatic coagulopathy. However, delayed administration of TXA appears to be ineffective or harmful. The effectiveness of prehospital TXA, incidence of thrombotic complications, benefit versus risk in advanced trauma systems and the mechanism of benefit remain uncertain.Methods and analysisThe Pre-hospital Anti-fibrinolytics for Traumatic Coagulopathy and Haemorrhage (The PATCH-Trauma study) is comparing TXA, initiated prehospital and continued in hospital over 8 hours, with placebo in patients with severe trauma at risk of acute traumatic coagulopathy. We present the trial protocol and an overview of the statistical analysis plan. There will be 1316 patients recruited by prehospital clinicians in Australia, New Zealand and Germany. The primary outcome will be the eight-level Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) at 6 months after injury, dichotomised to favourable (GOSE 5-8) and unfavourable (GOSE 1-4) outcomes, analysed using an intention-to-treat (ITT) approach. Secondary outcomes will include mortality at hospital discharge and at 6 months, blood product usage, quality of life and the incidence of predefined adverse events.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by The Alfred Hospital Research and Ethics Committee in Victoria and also approved in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory. In New Zealand, Northern A Health and Disability Ethics Committee provided approval. In Germany, Witten/Herdecke University has provided ethics approval. The PATCH-Trauma study aims to provide definitive evidence of the effectiveness of prehospital TXA, when used in conjunction with current advanced trauma care, in improving outcomes after severe injury.Trial registration numberNCT02187120.

Project description:In the Netherlands prehospital trauma care is provided by emergency medical services (EMS) nurses. This care is extended by Physician staffed Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (P-HEMS) for the more severely injured patient. Prehospital communication is a factor of influence on the identification of these patients and the dispatch of P-HEMS. Though prehospital communication it is often perceived to be incomplete and unstructured. To elucidated factors of influence on prehospital triage and the identification of the severely injured patient a Delphi study was performed.A three round modified Delphi study was designed to explore concepts amongst experts in prehospital trauma care. P-HEMS physicians/nurses, trauma surgeons, EMS nurses and dispatch center operators where asked to state their opinion regarding identification of the poly trauma patient, trauma patient characteristics, prehospital communication and prehospital handover.Seventy-one panellist completed all three rounds. For the first round seven cases and 13 theses were presented. From the answers/argumentation the second round was build, in which 68 theses had to be ranked within four principle themes: factors that influence prehospital communication, critical information for proper handover, factors influencing collaboration and how training/education can influence this. Out of these answers the third survey was build, focussing on determining the exact content of a prehospital trauma handover. The majority of the panellists agreed to a set of parameters resulting in a new model of inter-professional hand over regarding prehospital trauma patients.Exact identification of the poly trauma patient in need of care by P-HEMS is difficult though prehospital communication and the prehospital handover may be improved.The respondents report that prehospital communication needs to be unambiguous to improve trauma care. Consensus was reached on a set of ten parameters that should minimally be handed over with regard to a prehospital trauma patient. This to facilitate prehospital communication between the Dispatch centre, EMS, P-HEMS and the receiving hospital.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Prehospital notification of injured patients enables prompt and timely care in hospital through adequate preparation of trauma teams, space, equipment and consumables necessary for resuscitation, and may improve outcomes. In India, anecdotal reports suggest that prehospital notification, in those few places where it occurs, is unstructured and not linked to a well-defined hospital response. The aim of this manuscript is to describe, in detail, a study protocol for the evaluation of a formalised approach to prehospital notification. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This is a longitudinal prospective cohort study of injured patients being transported by ambulance to major trauma centres in India. In the preintervention phase, prospective data on patients will be collected on prehospital assessment, notification, inhospital assessment, management and outcomes and recorded in a new tailored multihospital trauma registry. All injured patients arriving by ambulance and allocated to a red or yellow priority category will be eligible for inclusion. The intervention will be a prehospital notification application to be used by ambulance clinicians to notify emergency departments of the impending arrival of a patient. The proportion of eligible patients arriving to hospital after notification will be the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes evaluated will be availability of a trauma cubicle, presence of a trauma team on patient arrival, time to first chest X-ray and inhospital mortality. PROGRESS:Ethical approval has been obtained from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi and site-specific approval granted by relevant trauma services. The trial has also been registered with the Monash University Human Research and Ethics Committee; Project number: CF16/1814 - 2016000929. Results will be fed back to prehospital and hospital clinicians via a series of reports and presentations. These will be used to facilitate discussions about service redesign and implementation. It is expected that evidence for improved outcomes will enable widespread adoption of this intervention among centres in all settings with less established tools for prehospital assessment and notification. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02877342; Pre-results.