
The TRISS methodology for evaluating trauma care has been applied in two UK hospitals over a 12 month period. Unexpected deaths occurred in both hospitals and were related to delays in transport between hospitals. The delays were instigated by the receiving hospitals and never the despatching hospital. Unexpected survival occurred in one of the hospitals. The common factors were: 1. Patients were taken there directly and did not require further transfer. 2. They were resuscitated by a consultant. 3. They were electively ventilated. 4. CT Scan excluded a neurosurgical emergency. 5. When surgery was required it was carried out early. 6. They were treated for several weeks in an ICU with 24 hour direct consultant involvement. They all developed septic shock and acute respiratory distress but ultimately made a full recovery. This evidence supports the view that direct transfer of patients to Trauma Centres in the UK is likely to reduce unnecessary deaths. The development of such a system and the location of such centres must be based on objective measures of case mix and performance. We recommend the establishment and development of a Major Trauma Outcome Study (MTOS) (UK).
Medical Audit, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, England, Trauma Centers, Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute, Humans, Wounds and Injuries, Severity of Illness Index, Diagnosis-Related Groups, ResearchInstitutes_Networks_Beacons/humanitarian_conflict_response_institute; name=Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute
Medical Audit, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, England, Trauma Centers, Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute, Humans, Wounds and Injuries, Severity of Illness Index, Diagnosis-Related Groups, ResearchInstitutes_Networks_Beacons/humanitarian_conflict_response_institute; name=Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 24 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
