ArticleCJEM2025
Analysis of secondary trauma transfers within a Canadian regional trauma network: room for improvement?
Article in CJEM, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study examines secondary trauma transfers of critically injured patients to an adult regional trauma centre in a mixed urban-suburban setting, to examine if these could be avoided through the provision of prehospital critical care at the scene of injury.
methodsThis is a cohort study of trauma activations at an adult regional trauma centre in Toronto, Canada, over a 5-year period. We included all secondary trauma transfers of patients who were either admitted to the ICU, had surgery within 4 h of arrival or died within 48 h of admission. Baseline demographics, injury data, geospatial data and interventions provided were extracted from the hospital's trauma registry.
results659 cases met the inclusion criteria during the five-year study period. 364 (55%) patients underwent secondary transfer from non-trauma centres located in relatively close proximity of 80 km or less. Within this group, patients had a median injury severity score of 22 (IQR 16-29) and the mortality was 17%. 188 (52%) received at least one critical care intervention at the sending facility prior to secondary transfer to the trauma centre. The most frequently performed interventions were emergency anesthesia and intubation (37%), blood transfusion (27%), and finger and/or tube thoracostomy (13%).
conclusionA significant proportion of critically injured patients in our mixed urban-suburban trauma network are transferred from non-trauma hospitals in relatively close proximity to the trauma centre. Non-trauma hospitals frequently provide time-critical and life-saving interventions prior to secondary transfer. A prehospital critical care scene response for major trauma should be explored as an option to deliver critical care interventions at the scene, followed by direct transport to a trauma centre.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40238022What 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.