ArticleDer Unfallchirurg2016
[Expectations from the TraumaNetwork DGU®: Which goals have been achieved? What can be improved?].
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.
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.
- [Comprehensive certification in the TraumaNetwork DGU. Milestones achieved and new challenges].Der Unfallchirurg · 2016Article
- [Current state of medical care of polytrauma and mass casualty incidents in Germany. Are we well-prepared?].Der Unfallchirurg · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
25135704What 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.