ArticleEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2021
What effect has the major trauma network had on perceptions of trauma care delivery amongst trauma teams in major trauma centres and neighbouring trauma units?
Article in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guidelines for Enhanced Recovery After Trauma and Intensive Care (ERATIC): Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) and International Association for Trauma Surgery and Intensive Care (IATSIC) Society Recommendations: Part 3: Trauma Ethics and Systems Aspects.World journal of surgery · 2025Guideline
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe Trauma network was established in April 2012 in England to improve the care of patients with trauma. The care of major trauma was centralised to major trauma centres. This article aims to survey trauma team members (TTM) to compare perceptions of trauma care delivery in major trauma centres (MTC) and trauma units (TU) from where major trauma care has been diverted.
methodsTrauma team members (TTM) from six hospitals were interviewed between June and July 2016. This included three MTCs and their neighbouring TU. Data were also gathered to determine appropriate trauma qualifications of TTMs.
resultsTTMs in MTCs perceived the standard of trauma service improved (90% increased, 10% same) since April 2012 in comparison to TUs (10% increased, 63% same, 27% decreased) (p ≤ 0.001). In MTCs, TTMs felt their skills improved more (66% improved, 34% unchanged) compared to TU's (24% improved, 64% unchanged, 12% regressed) (p ≤ 0.001). TTM's in MTCs were more satisfied with their trauma teams training (p ≤ 0.001), leader's communication (p ≤ 0.001) and handover process (p ≤ 0.01) in comparison to TTMs in TUs. 69% of doctors in MTCs held valid trauma qualifications as compared to only 37% in TUs (p ≤ 0.001).
conclusionThe centralisation of major trauma care to MTCs allows care for severely injured patients in specialised hospitals with allocated resources. This survey shows the effect of this reorganisation where diversion of major trauma from TUs may have led to their TTMs perceiving their standard of care to be less than TTMs in MTCs. This study recommends training support for TUs using modalities such as simulation-based training and regular audits to ensure improved perceptions and adequate qualifications. Multidisciplinary meetings between MTCs and TUs can allow information to be exchanged and shared to ensure reciprocal support and engagement to improve perception of trauma care delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.