Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25135704›Full record

ArticleDer Unfallchirurg2016

[Expectations from the TraumaNetwork DGU®: Which goals have been achieved? What can be improved?].

F Debus, C Mand, M Geraedts, C A Kühne, M Frink, H Siebert, S Ruchholtz

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Unfallchirurg, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

7 authors.

F DebusKlinik für Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg, Standort Marburg, Baldingerstraße, 35043, Marburg, Deutschland. debusfl@med.uni-marburg.de.
C MandKlinik für Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg, Standort Marburg, Baldingerstraße, 35043, Marburg, Deutschland.
M GeraedtsFakultät für Gesundheit, Institut für Gesundheitssystemforschung, Universität Witten/Herdecke, Witten, Deutschland.
C A KühneKlinik für Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg, Standort Marburg, Baldingerstraße, 35043, Marburg, Deutschland.
M FrinkKlinik für Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg, Standort Marburg, Baldingerstraße, 35043, Marburg, Deutschland.
H SiebertChirurgische Klinik II, Diakonie-Krankenhaus, Schwäbisch Hall, Deutschland.
S RuchholtzKlinik für Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg, Standort Marburg, Baldingerstraße, 35043, Marburg, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFollowing the establishment of the first trauma networks in 2009 an almost nationwide certification could be achieved. Despite the impressive number of 46 certified networks, little is known about the actual improvements and the satisfaction of the participating hospitals.

objectivesThis article aims to give a first representative overview of the expectations and actual achievements. MATERIAL AND

methodsAn online survey with a total of 36 questions was conducted in 884 hospitals. The questionnaire could be filled out online, sent by post or fax to the AKUT- Office. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed with Microsoft Excel.

resultsWith 326 responses, a response rate of 48.9% of all active hospitals was achieved. Of the participating hospitals 64.1% (209) were certified and had taken part in the project for an average of 3.9 years. The average score for satisfaction was 2.3, 72.4% (236) felt that there was a need for improvement in the care of severely injured patients and 46.6% (152) in the transfer of patients. In 47.2% (142) no improvement in cooperation with the ambulance service could be determined, 25.2% (82) documented an increase in the number of severely injured patients since participating in the trauma network (TNW-DGU) and 93.9% (306) of all hospitals wanted to participate in the trauma network in the future. DISCUSSION: It could be shown that important goals, such as simplification of patient transfer or general improvement in cooperation have been achieved. Overall there was a high level of satisfaction among the participating hospitals; however, the survey has identified some points which need to be improved by further intensive work.

Indexed as

Interinstitutional RelationsOrganizational ObjectivesGermanyHospital AdministrationHospitalsHumansOrthopedicsTraumatologyWounds and InjuriesCare of multiple injured patientsCooperationPatient transferQuality managementTrauma center

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.