韩国根据生理学标准进行创伤分类的适宜性评估

G. Kim, Jae Hun Kim, Hohyun Kim, Seon Hee Kim, Sung Jin Park, Sang Bong Lee, C. Park, Dongyeon Ryu, K. Lee, S. Kim, N. Lee, I. Wang
{"title":"韩国根据生理学标准进行创伤分类的适宜性评估","authors":"G. Kim, Jae Hun Kim, Hohyun Kim, Seon Hee Kim, Sung Jin Park, Sang Bong Lee, C. Park, Dongyeon Ryu, K. Lee, S. Kim, N. Lee, I. Wang","doi":"10.17479/jacs.2022.12.3.120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: A trauma center project for treating patients with trauma has been established in Korea. A trauma team is activated based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) field triage Step 1 for patient triage. Here, we determined if the currently applied criteria were appropriate for the triage of patients with trauma in Korea.Methods: This retrospective study included patients who were taken to the regional trauma center from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019, and were registered in the Korean Trauma database. The rates for undertriage and overtriage were calculated from the in-field and in-hospital triage according to the CDC guidelines Step 1.Results: Among the 9,383 patients transferred to the trauma center, 3,423 were directly transferred from the site and were investigated. The overall rates for undertriage and overtriage of these patients were 28.13% and 30.35%, respectively. For the patients who received in-field triage and were directly transferred to the trauma center, the rates for undertriage and overtriage were 27.92% and 32.39%, and 25.92% and 29.11% for in-hospital triage, respectively. The concordance rate of triage was 87.09%.Conclusion: The current use of in-hospital triage physiological criteria as set out in the CDC guidelines Step 1, indicated an undertriage rate which was high and an overtriage rate within the acceptable range. Further studies on triaging patients with trauma are warranted. Improvements in the guidelines of the trauma center project are necessary and this needs to be supported by resources and training for field personnel.","PeriodicalId":34662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Acute Care Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of the Suitability of Trauma Triage According to Physiological Criteria in Korea\",\"authors\":\"G. Kim, Jae Hun Kim, Hohyun Kim, Seon Hee Kim, Sung Jin Park, Sang Bong Lee, C. Park, Dongyeon Ryu, K. Lee, S. Kim, N. Lee, I. Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.17479/jacs.2022.12.3.120\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: A trauma center project for treating patients with trauma has been established in Korea. A trauma team is activated based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) field triage Step 1 for patient triage. Here, we determined if the currently applied criteria were appropriate for the triage of patients with trauma in Korea.Methods: This retrospective study included patients who were taken to the regional trauma center from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019, and were registered in the Korean Trauma database. The rates for undertriage and overtriage were calculated from the in-field and in-hospital triage according to the CDC guidelines Step 1.Results: Among the 9,383 patients transferred to the trauma center, 3,423 were directly transferred from the site and were investigated. The overall rates for undertriage and overtriage of these patients were 28.13% and 30.35%, respectively. For the patients who received in-field triage and were directly transferred to the trauma center, the rates for undertriage and overtriage were 27.92% and 32.39%, and 25.92% and 29.11% for in-hospital triage, respectively. The concordance rate of triage was 87.09%.Conclusion: The current use of in-hospital triage physiological criteria as set out in the CDC guidelines Step 1, indicated an undertriage rate which was high and an overtriage rate within the acceptable range. Further studies on triaging patients with trauma are warranted. Improvements in the guidelines of the trauma center project are necessary and this needs to be supported by resources and training for field personnel.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34662,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Acute Care Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Acute Care Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17479/jacs.2022.12.3.120\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Acute Care Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17479/jacs.2022.12.3.120","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在韩国建立了一个治疗创伤患者的创伤中心项目。根据疾病控制和预防中心(CDC)现场分诊步骤1,启动创伤小组进行患者分诊。在这里,我们确定目前适用的标准是否适用于韩国创伤患者的分类。方法:回顾性研究纳入2016年1月1日至2019年12月31日地区创伤中心收治的患者,并在韩国创伤数据库中登记。根据CDC指南第1步,从现场和医院分诊中计算出分诊不足和分诊过度的比率。结果:在转入创伤中心的9383例患者中,有3423例是直接从创伤中心转移过来的。总分诊不足率为28.13%,分诊过多率为30.35%。在接受现场分诊和直接转至创伤中心的患者中,分诊不足率和分诊过多率分别为27.92%和32.39%,院内分诊不足率和分诊过多率分别为25.92%和29.11%。分类符合率为87.09%。结论:按照CDC指南第1步的规定,目前使用的住院分诊生理标准显示分诊不足率较高,分诊过度率在可接受范围内。对创伤患者分诊的进一步研究是有必要的。改进创伤中心项目的指导方针是必要的,这需要得到现场人员的资源和培训的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessment of the Suitability of Trauma Triage According to Physiological Criteria in Korea
Purpose: A trauma center project for treating patients with trauma has been established in Korea. A trauma team is activated based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) field triage Step 1 for patient triage. Here, we determined if the currently applied criteria were appropriate for the triage of patients with trauma in Korea.Methods: This retrospective study included patients who were taken to the regional trauma center from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019, and were registered in the Korean Trauma database. The rates for undertriage and overtriage were calculated from the in-field and in-hospital triage according to the CDC guidelines Step 1.Results: Among the 9,383 patients transferred to the trauma center, 3,423 were directly transferred from the site and were investigated. The overall rates for undertriage and overtriage of these patients were 28.13% and 30.35%, respectively. For the patients who received in-field triage and were directly transferred to the trauma center, the rates for undertriage and overtriage were 27.92% and 32.39%, and 25.92% and 29.11% for in-hospital triage, respectively. The concordance rate of triage was 87.09%.Conclusion: The current use of in-hospital triage physiological criteria as set out in the CDC guidelines Step 1, indicated an undertriage rate which was high and an overtriage rate within the acceptable range. Further studies on triaging patients with trauma are warranted. Improvements in the guidelines of the trauma center project are necessary and this needs to be supported by resources and training for field personnel.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
A Case of Acute Appendicitis Complicated by Necrotizing Fasciitis Requiring Abdominal Wall Reconstruction Management of Respiratory Failure in Shoulder Arthroscopy: A Case Report Difficult Small Bowel Bleeding in Surgical View The Association of Isolated Cecal Necrosis Symptoms with Acute Appendicitis: A Case Report The Effect of Polymyxin B-Immobilized Fiber Column Hemoperfusion for Sepsis: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1