ObjectiveThis study prospectively evaluated in-hospital and postdischarge missed injury rates in admitted trauma patients, before and after the formalisation of a trauma tertiary survey (TTS) procedure. MethodsProspective before-and-after cohort study. TTS were formalised in a single regional level II trauma hospital in November 2009. All multitrauma patients admitted between March–October 2009 (preformalisation of TTS) and December 2009–September 2010 (post-) were assessed for missed injury, classified into three types: Type I, in-hospital, (injury missed at initial assessment, detected within 24 h); Type II, in-hospital (detected in hospital after 24 h, missed at initial assessment and by TTS); Type III, postdischarge (detected after hospital discharge). Secondary outcome measures included TTS performance rates and functional outcomes at 1 and 6 months. ResultsA total of 487 trauma patients were included (pre-: n = 235; post-: n = 252). In-hospital missed injury rate (Types I and II combined) was similar for both groups (3.8 vs. 4.8 %, P = 0.61), as were postdischarge missed injury rates (Type III) at 1 month (13.7 vs. 11.5 %, P = 0.43), and 6 months (3.8 vs. 3.3 %, P = 0.84) after discharge. TTS performance was substantially higher in the post-group (27 vs. 42 %, P < 0.001). Functional outcomes for both cohorts were similar at 1 and 6 months follow-up.ConclusionsThis is the first study to evaluate missed injury rates after hospital discharge and demonstrated cumulative missed injury rates >15 %. Some of these injuries were clinically relevant. Although TTS performance was significantly improved by formalising the process (from 27 to 42 %), this did not decrease missed injury rates.
Cardiopulmonary monitors (CPMs) generate false alarm rates ranging from 85%-99% with few of these alarms actually representing serious clinical events. The overabundance of clinically insignificant alarms in hospitals desensitizes the clinician to true-positive alarms and poses significant safety issues. In this IRB-approved externally funded study, we sought to assess the clinical conditions associated with true and false-positive CPM alarms and attempted to define optimal alarm parameters that would reduce false-positive alarm rates (as they relate to clinically significant events) and thus improve overall CPM performance in critically ill children. Prior to the study, clinically significant events (CSEs) were defined and validated. Over a seven-month period in 2009, critically ill children underwent evaluation of CSEs while connected to a CPM. Comparative CPM and CSE data were analyzed with an aim to estimate sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for CSEs. CPM and CSE data were evaluated in 98 critically ill children. Overall, 2,245 high priority alarms were recorded with 68 CSEs noted in 45 observational days. During the course of the study, the team developed a firm understanding of CPM functionality, including the pitfalls associated with aggregation and analysis of CPM alarm data. The inability to capture all levels of CPM alarms represented a significant study challenge. Selective CPM data can be easily queried with standard reporting, however the default settings with this reporting exclude critical information necessary in compiling a coherent study denominator database. Although the association between CPM alarms and CSEs could not be comprehensively evaluated, preliminary analysis reflected poor CPM alarm specificity. This study provided the necessary considerations for the proper design of a future study that improves the positive predictive value of CPM alarms. In addition, this investigation has resulted in improved awareness of CPM alarm parameter settings and associated false-positive alarms. This information has been incorporated into nursing educational programs.
Background Initial management of trauma patients is focused on identifying life-and limb-threatening injuries and may lead to missed injuries. A tertiary survey can minimise the number and effect of missed injuries and involves a physical re-examination and review of all investigations within 24 h of admission. There is little information on current practice of tertiary survey performance in hospitals without a dedicated trauma service. We aimed to determine the rate of tertiary survey performance and the detail of documentation as well as the baseline rate of missed injuries. Methods We performed a retrospective, descriptive study of all multitrauma patients who presented to an Australian level II regional trauma centre without a dedicated trauma service between May 2008 and February 2009. A medical records review was conducted to determine tertiary survey performance and missed injury rate. Results Of 252 included trauma patients, 20% (n = 51) had a tertiary survey performed. A total of nine missed injuries were detected in eight patients (3.2%). Of the multiple components of the tertiary survey, most were poorly documented. Documentation was more comprehensive in the subgroup of patients who did have a formal tertiary survey.
Training equipment users to operate medical equipment effectively and safely is one of the most important and difficult tasks of clinical engineers. As medical equipment proliferates and becomes more complex, the task of education also becomes more difficult. The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) requires that all equipment users be trained annually in proper operating procedures for the equipment they use and that the training be documented. Therefore, each hospital must develop educational programs to meet those needs. This paper illustrates the use of an interactive computer-assisted instruction (CAI) program, entitled EquipTeach, to provide an effective, standardized and cost-effective method of training equipment users at the John Dempsey Hospital of The University of Connecticut Health Center in Farmington, Connecticut.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.