ArticleThe American surgeon2017
Where We Fail: Location and Timing of Failure to Rescue in Trauma.
Article in The American surgeon, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Mortality in severely injured patients: nearly one of five non-survivors have been already discharged alive from ICU.BMC anesthesiology · 2020Article
- Failure to Rescue as an Outcome Metric for Pediatric and Congenital Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory Programs: Analysis of Data From the IMPACT Registry.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2019Article
- Failure to rescue in surgical patients: A review for acute care surgeons.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2019Review
- The Location and Timing of Failure-to-Rescue Events Across a Statewide Trauma System.The Journal of surgical research · 2019Observational
- Variability in Current Trauma Systems and Outcomes.Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shockArticle
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
Abstract
Failure to rescue (FTR) is an outcome metric that reflects a center's ability to prevent mortality after a major complication. Identifying the timing and location of FTR events could help target efforts to reduce FTR rates. We sought to characterize the timing and location of FTR occurrences at our center, hypothesizing that FTR rates would be highest early after injury and in settings of lower intensity of care. We used data, prospectively collected from 2009 to 2013, on patients ≥16 years old with minimum Abbreviated Injury Score ≥2 from a single institution. Major complications (per Pennsylvania Trauma Systems Foundation definitions), mortality, and FTR rates were examined by location [prehospital, emergency department, operating room, intensive care unit (ICU), and interventional radiology] and by day post admission. Kruskal-Wallis and chi-squared tests were used to compare variables (P = 0.05). Major complications occurred in 899/6150 (14.6%) of patients [median age: 42, interquartile range (IQR): 25-57; 56% African American, 73% male, 76% blunt; median Injury Severity Score: 10, IQR: 5-17]. Of 899, 111 died (FTR = 12.4%). Compared with non-FTR cases, FTR cases had earlier complications (median day 1 (IQR: 0-4) versus 5 (IQR: 2-8), P < 0.001). FTR rates were highest in the prehospital (55%), emergency department (38%), and operating room (36%) settings, but the greatest number of FTR cases occurred in the ICU (52/111, 47%). FTR rates were highest early after injury, but the majority of cases occurred in the ICU. Efforts to reduce institutional FTR rates should focus on complications that occur in the ICU setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28316308PMC5858556What 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.