Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28564706›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2017

Patient Experiences of Trauma Resuscitation.

Elinore J Kaufman, Therese S Richmond, Douglas J Wiebe, Sara F Jacoby, Daniel N Holena

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Evaluation and analysis of clinical outcome prediction for trauma patients based on machine learning.Chinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Continuing Education Certificate in Trauma Skills Among Emergency Nurses: A National Sample Survey Analysis.Journal of trauma nursing : the official journal of the Society of Trauma Nurses
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elinore J KaufmanDepartment of Surgery, NewYork-Presbyterian Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York.
Therese S RichmondUniversity of Pennsylvania School of Nursing, Philadelphia.
Douglas J WiebeEpidemiology in Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Sara F JacobyCenter for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Daniel N HolenaDepartment of Surgery, Division of Traumatology, Surgical Critical Care and Emergency Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
University of Pennsylvania · USCornell University · US

Funding

The Penn Violence and Injury Control Research CenterR49CE002474 · CE · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI WIEBE, DOUGLAS J · 2014 to 2018
$2.2M
NCIPC CDC HHS R49 CE002474
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importancePatient satisfaction is an increasingly common feature of quality measurement, and patient-centered care is a key aspect of high-quality clinical care. Incorporating patient preferences in an acute context, such as trauma resuscitation, presents distinct challenges; however, to our knowledge, patients' experiences of trauma resuscitation have not been explored.

objectivesTo describe patient experiences of trauma resuscitation and to identify opportunities to improve patient experience without compromising speed or thoroughness. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsThis qualitative, descriptive study was conducted at an urban, academic, level I trauma center. Semistructured interviews and video observations were conducted from May to December 2015. Interview participants were adult English-speaking patients who had experienced trauma resuscitation and were clinically stable with no alteration in consciousness. We recruited interview participants and conducted video observations until thematic saturation was reached, resulting in 30 interviews and 20 observations. Video observation patients did not overlap with interview participants. The purposive sample included equal numbers of violently and nonviolently injured patients. Data were analyzed for thematic content from June 2015 to April 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The main outcomes reported are themes of patient experience.

resultsOf 30 interview participants, 25 were men (83.3%), and 21 were black (70.0%). Of 20 video observation patients, 16 were men (80.0%), and 17 were black (85.0%). Salient aspects of patient experience of trauma resuscitation included emotional responses, physical experience, nonclinical concerns, treatment and procedures, trauma team members' interactions, communication, and comfort. Participants drew satisfaction from trauma team members' demeanor, expertise, and efficiency and valued clear clinical communication, as well as words of reassurance. Dissatisfaction stemmed from the perceived absence of these attributes and from participants' emotional or physical discomfort. Observation data added insight into the components of care that may have contributed to participants' responses and those aspects of care that were not salient to participants. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although the urgency of trauma care limits explicit discussion and consideration of patient priorities, we found that patient concerns corresponded well with trauma team goals. Patients perceived trauma team members as competent, efficient, and caring. Focusing on patient communication could further improve patient-centeredness in this setting.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionResuscitationTrauma CentersAdultClinical CompetenceCommunicationFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedProfessional-Patient RelationsQualitative ResearchQuality ImprovementVideo Recording

Identifiers

PMID28564706
PMCPMC5710455
OpenAlexW2618914954

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.