Dataset Information

Surgeon choice in management of pediatric abdominal trauma.

ABSTRACT:

Background

No guidelines exist for management of hemodynamically stable children with suspected hollow viscus injury. We sought to determine factors contributing to surgeon management of these patients.

Methods

Surgeon members of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma and American Pediatric Surgical Association completed a survey on 3 blunt abdominal injury scenarios: (1) isolated, (2) with multisystem injury, and (3) with traumatic brain injury (TBI), and a penetrating injury scenario. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with initial management of observation vs. operation for blunt injury and observation vs. local wound exploration versus laparoscopy for penetrating injury.

Results

Of 394 surgeons (response rate 22.3%), 50.3% were pediatric surgeons. For scenarios 1-3, 32.2%, 49.3%, and 60.7% of surgeons chose operation over observation, respectively. Compared to isolated blunt injury, surgeons were more likely to choose operation for patients with multisystem injury (aOR 2.20, 95%CI: 1.78-2.72) or TBI (aOR 3.60, 95%CI: 2.79-4.66). Pediatric surgeons were less likely to choose operation (aOR 0.32, 95%CI: 0.22-0.44). For penetrating injury, 39.1%, 29.5%, and 31.5% of surgeons chose observation, local wound exploration, and laparoscopy, respectively.

Conclusions

Large variation exists in management of hemodynamically stable children with suspected hollow viscus injury. Although patient injury characteristics account for some variation, surgeon factors such as type of surgeon also play a role. Evidence-based practice guidelines should be developed to standardize care.

Type of study

Cross-Sectional Survey.

Level of evidence

N/A.

SUBMITTER: Butler EK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7855195 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study designSecondary overtriage is a burden to the medical system. Unnecessary transfers overload trauma centers, occupy emergency transfer resources, and delay definitive patient care. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) trauma, especially in isolation, is a frequent culprit.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to assess the perspectives of facial trauma surgeons regarding the interfacility transfer of patients with isolated CMF trauma.MethodsA 31-item survey was developed using Likert-type scale and open-ended response systems. Internal consistency testing among facial trauma surgeons yielded a Cronbach's α calculation of .75. The survey was distributed anonymously to the American Society of Maxillofacial Surgeons, the North American Division of AO Craniomaxillofacial, and the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Statistical significance in response plurality was determined by nonoverlapping 99.9% confidence intervals (P < .001). Sum totals were reported as means with standard deviations and z scores with P values of less than .05 considered significant.ResultsThe survey yielded 196 responses. Seventy-seven percent of respondents did not believe that most isolated CMF transfers required emergency surgery and roughly half (49%) thought that most emergency transfers were unnecessary. Fifty-four percent of respondents agreed that most patients transferred could have been referred for outpatient management and 87% thought that transfer guidelines could help decrease unnecessary transfers. Twenty-seven percent of respondents had no pre-transfer communication with the referring facility. Perspectives on the transfer of specific fracture patterns and their presentations were also collected.ConclusionMost facial trauma surgeons in this study believe that emergent transfer for isolated CMF trauma is frequently unnecessary. Such injuries rarely require emergent surgery and can frequently be managed in the outpatient setting without activating emergency transfer services. The fracture-specific data collected are a representation of the national, multidisciplinary opinion of facial trauma surgeons and correlate with previously published data on which specific types of facial fractures are most often transferred unnecessarily. The results of this study can serve as the foundation for interfacility transfer guidelines, which may provide a valuable resource in triaging transfers and decreasing associated health-care costs.

Project description:BackgroundPediatric trauma, particularly major trauma cases, are often treated in less than optimal facilities by providers who lack training and experience in treating severely injured children. We aimed to develop a management model for admission and treatment of pediatric trauma using the Theory of Constraints (TOC).MethodsWe conducted interviews with 17 highly experienced policy makers, senior nursing managers and medical managers in pediatrics and trauma. The interviews were analyzed by qualitative methods. The TOC was utilized to identify undesirable effects (UDEs) and core challenges, and to design a focused current reality tree (CRT). Subsequently, a management model for optimal admission and treatment of pediatric trauma was constructed.ResultsThe CRT was illustrated according to 4 identified UDEs focusing on lack of: (1) clear definitions of case manager in pediatric trauma; (2) uniform criteria regarding the appropriate site for admitting pediatric trauma, (3) standard guidelines and protocols for treatment of trauma cases and for training of trauma medical teams; and (4) standard guidelines for evacuating pediatric trauma patients. The management model for treatment and admission of pediatric trauma is based on 3 major elements: human resources, hospital policy concerning the appropriate emergency department (ED) for pediatric trauma patients and clear definitions regarding children and trauma levels. Each of the elements contains components that should be clearly defined in order for a medical center to be designated for admitting and treating pediatric trauma patients.ConclusionsOur analysis suggests that the optimal ED for pediatric trauma cases is one with available operating rooms, intensive care beds, an imaging unit, laboratories and equipment suitable for treating children as well as with staff trained to treat children with trauma. To achieve optimal outcomes, medical centers in Israel should be classified according to their trauma treatment capabilities and their ability to treat varied severities of pediatric trauma cases.