2009
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-009-0193-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

In Search of Benchmarking for Mortality Following Multiple Trauma: A Swiss Trauma Center Experience

Abstract: Because of the current lack of a single, internationally accepted scoring system for the prediction of mortality after multiple trauma, the comparison of outcomes between medical centers remains unreliable. To achieve effective quality control, a practical benchmarking model, such as the TRISS-NTDB, should be used worldwide.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
1
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 123 publications
2
1
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the present study, the overall mortality of patients with multiple traumas was 18.8%, which is similar to the findings of previous studies in which the mortality of patients with multiple traumas was 18.7%-22.8% [ 1 11 13 21 ]. Comparatively, in patients with trauma in one body region, global mortality is reportedly 0.5%-6% [ 22 ]; these results collectively indicate higher mortality in patients with multiple traumas.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…In the present study, the overall mortality of patients with multiple traumas was 18.8%, which is similar to the findings of previous studies in which the mortality of patients with multiple traumas was 18.7%-22.8% [ 1 11 13 21 ]. Comparatively, in patients with trauma in one body region, global mortality is reportedly 0.5%-6% [ 22 ]; these results collectively indicate higher mortality in patients with multiple traumas.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Our series comprised 898 multiple trauma patients with a mean ISS of 21.3 and a mortality of 10.7 %. These figures are similar to those published in previous studies, which record mortality rates of 10 % for ISS B 15 and up to 20 % for ISS C 15 [16][17][18][19]. Patients who died had significantly higher mean ISS than the series as a whole (42 vs 21.3), but the ISS did not differ significantly between the different types of mortality (preventable, potentially preventable, and nonpreventable; see Table 1).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Одним из лучших подходов к оказанию медицинской помощи больным с травмами является наличие травматологической команды в приемном отделении, действующей по стандартному алгоритму [33,34]. Объем действий должен включать в себя верную оценку тяжести состояния пациента, проведение реанимационных мероприятий и определение необходимой оперативной тактики [35,36].…”
Section: оценка степени тяжести политравмы и ортохирургический подходunclassified