ArticleDer Unfallchirurg2012
[Interhospital transfer of severely injured patients in Germany. Evaluation of the DGU trauma register].
Article in Der Unfallchirurg, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the interhospital patient transfer after implementation of a regionalized trauma care system (TraumaNetzwerk DGUFrontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Trauma networks: present and future challenges.BMC medicine · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe TraumaNetzwerk(D) DGU was founded 3 years ago and since then the majority of trauma centers have been registered and organized into regional trauma network services (TNW). Within these networks assessment criteria for transferring patients to higher level hospitals are defined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence, causes, implications and quality of care for patients with major trauma who were transferred for definitive treatment before implementation of the TraumaNetzwerk(D) DGU in Germany. PATIENT AND
methodsThe data of 19,035 patients listed in the German Trauma Register of the German Society for Trauma Surgery (DGU, 2002-2007) were analyzed. Patients with an injury severity score (ISS) >9 and a blood pressure documented on admission were included into the study. Data were allocated according to patients where therapy was performed completely in the primary hospital of admission (group I; n=16,033; 84.2%) and patients transferred after primary care from one hospital to another centre for definitive care (group II; n=3,002; 15.8%). Comparative parameters were the pattern and severity of injury, physiological state on admission and clinical outcome.
resultsMean ISS and percentage of patients with an ISS ≥25 did not differ significantly between groups. Of the patients who were transferred to a higher level trauma centre (group II) 20.7% needed catecholamines on admission, 10.1% were in shock (blood pressure <90 mmHg) and 2.5% of the patients underwent resuscitation in the emergency department. Patients of group II had a considerably longer hospital stay (31.2±35.5 days) than patients of group I (24.8±27.1 days). Furthermore, treatment costs were significantly higher for group II (I: EUR 23,870; II: EUR 26,054).
conclusionsA relevant percentage of patients transferred from one hospital to another were hemodynamically and clinically unstable. To what extent the quality of patient transfer and therefore major trauma care is improved by the implementation of regional trauma networks in Germany remains to be seen over the next years.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.