Journal of Trauma and Injury

Original Articles

PARK Index and S-score Can Be Good Quality Indicators for the Preventable Mortality in a Single Trauma Center: Chan Yong Park, Kyung Hag Lee, Na Yun Lee, Su Ji Kim, Hyun Min Cho, Chan Kyu Lee; J Trauma Inj. 2017;30(4):126-130. Published online December 30, 2017; DOI: https://doi.org/10.20408/jti.2017.30.4.126

3,778 View
22 Download

Abstract PDF: Purpose
Preventable Trauma Death Rate (PTDR) using Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) has been most widely used as a quality indicator in South Korea. However, this method has a small number of deaths corresponding to the denominator. Therefore, it is difficult to check the change of quality improvement for annual mortality, and there is a disadvantage that variation is severe. Therefore, we attempted to improve the quality of the mortality evaluation by reducing the variation by applying the PARK Index (preventable major trauma death rate, PMTDR) which can increase the number of denominator significantly. And the Save score (S-score) was also examined as another quality indicator.
Methods
In the PARK Index, the denominator is number of all patients who have survival probability (Ps) larger than 0.25. Numerator is the number of deaths among these. The PARK Index includes only patients with ISS >15. The S-score is calculated in the same way as the W-score, but the S-score includes only patients with ISS >15, which is a difference from the W-score.
Results
PARK Index decreased annually and was 12.9 (37/287) in 2014, 9.6 (33/343) in 2015, and 7.3 (52/709) in 2016. S-score increased annually and was ?0.29 in 2014, 4.21 in 2015, and 8.75 in 2016.
Conclusions
PARK Index and S-score improved annually. This shows that both quality indicators are improving year by year. PARK Index (PMTDR) has 9.5-fold increase in denominator overall compared to PTDR by TRISS. The S-score used only ISS >15 patients as a denominator. Therefore, there is an advantage that the numerical value change is larger than the W-score. In addition, S-score is not affected by the ratio of major trauma patients to minor trauma patients.; Summary

Management of Severe Trauma Patients in the Emergency Intensive Care Unit: Ji Ju Kim, Gil Joon Suh, Ki Young Jeong, Woon Yong Kwon, Kyung Su Kim, Hui Jai Lee, Yeong Cheol Kim, Seok Ho Choi, Young Ho Lee, Kyung Hag Lee, Kook Nam Han, Hwan Jun Jae, Hyo Cheol Kim; J Korean Soc Traumatol. 2011;24(2):98-104.

1,346 View
9 Download

Abstract PDF: PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of the trauma care system of our hospital, in which emergency physicians care for major trauma patients in the emergency intensive care unit (ICU) in consultation with intervention radiologists and surgeons.
METHODS
This was a retrospective observational study conducted in an emergency ICU of a tertiary referral hospital. We enrolled consecutive patients who had been admitted to our emergency ICU with major trauma from March 2007 to September 2010. We collected data with respect to demographic findings, mechanisms of injury, the trauma and injury severity score (TRISS), emergency surgery, angiographic intervention, and 6-month mortality. Then, we compared the observed and predicted survivals of the patients. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test and calibration plots by using 10 groups, one for each decile, of predicted mortality were used to evaluate the fitness of TRISS. P-values of greater than 0.05 represent a fair calibration.
RESULTS
Among 116 patients, 12 (10.34%) were dead within 6 months after admission to the ICU, and 29 (25.00%) and 38 (32.80%) patients received emergency surgery and angiographic intervention, respectively. The mean injury severity score and revised trauma score were 36.97+/-17.73 and 7.84+/-6.75, respectively. The observed survival and the predicted survival of the TRISS were 89.66% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 84.03~95.28%) and 69.85% (95% CI: 63.80~75.91%), respectively. The calibration plots showed that the observed survival of our patients was consistently higher than the predicted survival of the TRISS (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION
The observed survival for the trauma care system of our hospital, in which emergency physicians care for major trauma patients in the emergency ICU in consultation with intervention radiologists and surgeons, was higher than the predicted survival of the TRISS.; Summary

The Adequacy of a Cross Table Lateral Cervical X-ray in Severely Traumatized Korean Patients: Kyung Hag Lee, Yeong Cheol Kim, Seok Ho Choi, Gook Nam Han, Soo Un Lee, Jung Eun Lee, Gil Joon Suh, Yeo Kyu Yoon; J Trauma Inj. 2012;25(4):241-246.

1,098 View
4 Download

Abstract PDF: PURPOSE
The objective of this study was to investigate the appropriateness of the cross table lateral cervical X-ray used in the emergency department for severely traumatized Korean patients.
METHODS
Patients visiting our institution from May 2011 to May 2012, who had injury severity score (ISS) > 15 and who received a cervical X-ray in the emergency department, were included in this study. Data including demographics, ISS score, GCS score, and place where the x-ray was taken were collected to evaluate their relationship with appropriate coverage of the cervical X-ray. The appropriateness of a cervical cross lateral view X-ray was evaluated using exposure of the basion, and the opisthion, as well as the distal level of exposure.
RESULTS
Fifty-two patients were included in this study. The identification rate of the basion was 79.2%, and the identification rate of the opisthion was 88.7%. Complete exposure of C7/T1 was accomplished in 3.8% of the patients. The ISS was higher for X-ray taken in the trauma bay, but the range of exposure showed no difference between the places where the X-rays taken. Patients who had exposure of C 5/6 or more had lower body weight and body mass index (BMI) compared with unexposed patients.
CONCLUSION
In severely traumatized Korean patients, the adequacy of the cross table lateral cervical X-ray was inappropriate in most cases. No difference was observed in the exposure range between the places where the X-rays were taken, and patients with less exposure showed higher body weight and higher BMI.; Summary

Treatment of Combat-related Gunshot and Explosive Injuries to the Extremities: Jung Eun Lee, Young Ho Lee, Goo Hyun Baek, Kyung Hag Lee, Young Jae Cho, Yeong Cheol Kim, Gil Joon Suh; J Trauma Inj. 2013;26(3):111-124.

1,042 View
6 Download

Abstract PDF: PURPOSE
We should prepare proper medical service for disaster control as South Korea is not free from terrorism and war, as we experienced through the two naval battles of the Yeonpyeong, one in 1999 and the other in 2002, the sinking of Cheonan in 2010, and the attack against the border island of Yeonpyeong in 2010. Moreover, North Korea's increasingly bellicose rhetoric and mounting military threats against the world demand instant action to address the issue. The aim of this article is to describe our experience with three patients with combat-related gunshot and explosive injuries to their extremities and to establish useful methods for the management of patients with combat-related injuries.
METHODS
Three personnel who had been injured by gunshot or explosion during either the second naval battle of the Yeonpyeong in 2002 or the attack against the border island of Yeonpyeong in 2010 were included in our retrospective analysis. There were one case of gunshot injury and two cases of explosive injuries to the extremities, and the injured regions were the left hand, the right foot, and the right humerus. In one case, the patient had accompanying abdominal injuries, and his vital signs were unstable. He recovered after early initial management and appropriate emergency surgery.
RESULTS
All patients underwent emergent surgical debridement and temporary fixation surgery in the same military hospital immediately after their evacuations from the combat area. After that, continuous administration of antibiotics and wound care were performed, and definite reconstructions were carried out in a delayed manner. In the two cases in which flap operations for soft tissue coverage were required, one operation was performed 5 weeks after the injury, and the other operation was performed 7 weeks after the injury. Definite procedures for osteosynthesis were performed at 3 months in all cases. Complete union and adequate functional recovery were achieved in all cases.
CONCLUSION
The patient should be stabilized and any life-threatening injuries must first be evaluated and treated with damage control surgery. Staged treatment and strict adherence to traditional principles for open fractures are recommended for combat-related gunshot and explosive injuries to the extremities.; Summary

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search