Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23723617›Full record

ArticleJournal of emergencies, trauma, and shock2013

Evaluating trauma center process performance in an integrated trauma system with registry data.

Lynne Moore, André Lavoie, Marie-Josée Sirois, Rachid Amini, Amina Belcaïd, John S Sampalis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shock, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Canadian benchmarks for acute injury care.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie · 2017
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Lynne MooreDepartment of Social and Preventative Medicine, Québec (Qc), Canada ; Unité de traumatologie-urgence-soins intensifs, Centre de Recherche du CHA (Hôpital de l'Enfant-Jésus), Québec (Qc), Canada.
André Lavoie
Marie-Josée Sirois
Rachid Amini
Amina Belcaïd
John S Sampalis

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe evaluation of trauma center performance implies the use of indicators that evaluate clinical processes. Despite the availability of routinely collected clinical data in most trauma systems, quality improvement efforts are often limited to hospital-based audit of adverse patient outcomes.

objectiveTo identify and evaluate a series of process performance indicators (PPI) that can be calculated using routinely collected trauma registry data. MATERIALS AND

methodsPPI were identified using a review of published literature, trauma system documentation, and expert consensus. Data from the 59 trauma centers of the Quebec trauma system (1999, 2006; N = 99,444) were used to calculate estimates of conformity to each PPI for each trauma center. Outliers were identified by comparing each center to the global mean. PPI were evaluated in terms of discrimination (between-center variance), construct validity (correlation with designation level and patient volume), and forecasting (correlation over time).

resultsFifteen PPI were retained. Global proportions of conformity ranged between 6% for reduction of a major dislocation within 1 h and 97% for therapeutic laparotomy. Between-center variance was statistically significant for 13 PPI. Five PPI were significantly associated with designation level, 7 were associated with volume, and 11 were correlated over time.

conclusionIn our trauma system, results suggest that a series of 15 PPI supported by literature review or expert opinion can be calculated using routinely collected trauma registry data. We have provided evidence of their discrimination, construct validity, and forecasting properties. The between-center variance observed in this study highlights the importance of evaluating process performance in integrated trauma systems.

Indexed as

Clinical processesperformance indicatorsquality of caretrauma system

Identifiers

PMID23723617
PMCPMC3665078

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.