RESEARCH PAPER
Comparison of American guidelines for field triage and Polish criteria as qualification to a trauma center
 
More details
Hide details
1
Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland
 
2
The President Stanisław Wojciechowski State University of Applied Sciences in Kalisz, Kalisz, Poland
 
 
Corresponding author
Dariusz Timler   

Medical University of Lodz, Poland
 
 
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2019;26(3):479-482
 
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Trauma is the third cause of death among the general population in Poland, and the first in people aged 1–44 years. Trauma centers are hospitals dedicated to treating patients with multiple organ injuries, in a complex way that endeavours to ensure a lower mortality rate, shorter hospital stay and better outcomes if the patients are transferred to such a center. Worldwide, there are many models on how to treat a trauma patient, but them to be qualified for the procedure, the selection of potential patients is crucial.

Objective:
The aim of the study was to compare the Polish model for qualification to a trauma center and American Guidelines for Field Triage.

Material and methods:
Retrospective analysis of medical documentation recorded between 1 January 2014 – 31 December 2014 was undertaken. The study concerned trauma patients admitted to the Emergency Department of the Regional Trauma Center at the Copernicus Memorial Hospital in Łódź, Poland. Inclusion criterion was initial diagnosis ‘multiple-organ injury’ among patients transported by the Emergency Medical Service (EMS).

Results:
In the period indicated, 3,173 patients were admitted to the Emergency Department at the Copernicus Memorial Hospital. From among them, 159 patients were included in the study. Only 13.2% of the patients fulfilled the Polish Qualification Criteria to Trauma Center in comparison to 87.4% who fulfilled the American Guidelines for Field Triage.

Conclusions:
Polish qualification criteria do not consider the large group of patients with severe injuries (ISS>15), but indicate patients with minimal chance of survival. Polish criteria do not consider the mechanism of injury, which is a relevant predictive indicator of severe or extremely severe injuries (ISS>15). Further studies should be undertaken to improve the qualification and treatment of trauma patients in Poland.

 
REFERENCES (13)
1.
Stańczak J, et al. Basic information about demographic development in Poland. General Statistics Departament data; 2015.
 
2.
National Hygiene Institute. Health status of Polish Population. www.pzh.gov.pl/page/fileadmin/user_upload/statystyka/Raport_stanu_zdrowia_2012. pdf [accessed 30.06.2016].
 
3.
Bouzat P, Ageron FX, Brun J, Levrat A, Berthet M, Rancurel E, et al. A regional trauma system to optimize the pre-hospital triage of trauma patients. Crit Care. 2015 Mar 18; 19: 111. doi: 10.1186/s13054–015–0835–7.
 
4.
Liu T, Bai XJ. Trauma care system in China. Chin J Traumatol. 2018 Apr; 21(2): 80–83. doi: 10.1016/j.cjtee.2017.06.004. Epub 2017 Nov 4.
 
5.
Lerner EB, Willenbring BD, Pirrallo RG, Brasel KJ, Cady CE, Colella MR, et al. A consensus-based criterion standard for trauma center need. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014 Apr; 76(4): 1157–63. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000000189.
 
6.
American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma. Prehospital Trauma Care. In: American College of Surgeons. editor. Resources for the Optimal Care of the Injured Patient. 2006: 21‐25.
 
7.
Dz.U. 2010 nr 118 poz. 803 – Rozporządzenie Ministra Zdrowia z dnia 18 czerwca 2010 r. w sprawie centrum urazowego.
 
8.
Sasser SM, Hunt RC, Faul M, Sugerman D, Pearson WS, Dulski T, et al. Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Guidelines for field triage of injured patients: recommendations of the National Expert Panel on Field Triage. 2011. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2012 Jan; 13: 61(RR-1).
 
9.
Gennarelli TA, Wodzin E, editors. Abbreviated Injury Scale 2005 – Update 2008. Barrington. IL: Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine; 2009.
 
10.
Palmer CS, Gabbe BJ, Cameron PA. Defining major trauma using the 2008 Abbreviated Injury Scale. Injury. 2016 Jan; 47(1): 109–15. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2015.07.003.
 
11.
Smith BP, Goldberg AJ, Gaughan JP, Seamon MJ. A comparison of Injury Severity Score and New Injury Severity Score after penetrating trauma: A prospective analysis. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015 Aug; 79(2): 269–74. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000000753.
 
12.
Davis JW, Dirks RC, Sue LP, Kaups KL. Attempting to validate the overtriage/undertriage matrix at a Level I trauma center. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017 Dec; 83(6): 1173–1178. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000001623.
 
13.
Galvagno SM Jr, Massey M, Bouzat P, Vesselinov R, Levy MJ, Millin MG, et al. Correlation Between the Revised Trauma Score and Injury Severity Score: Implications for Prehospital Trauma Triage. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2018 Aug; 23:1–8. doi: 10.1080/10903127.2018.1489019.
 
eISSN:1898-2263
ISSN:1232-1966
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top