A Systematic Literature Review of Trauma Systems: An Operations Management Perspective.

0 REHABILITATION
Advances in rehabilitation science and practice Pub Date : 2025-01-16 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/27536351241310645
Zihao Wang, Bahman Rostami-Tabar, Jane Haider, Mohamed Naim, Javvad Haider
{"title":"A Systematic Literature Review of Trauma Systems: An Operations Management Perspective.","authors":"Zihao Wang, Bahman Rostami-Tabar, Jane Haider, Mohamed Naim, Javvad Haider","doi":"10.1177/27536351241310645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Trauma systems provide comprehensive care across various settings, from prehospital services to rehabilitation, integrating clinical and social care aspects. Established in the 1970s, these systems are pivotal yet under-researched in their operational management. This study aims to fill this gap by focussing on the integration of operations management (OM) techniques to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of trauma systems. By leveraging proven OM strategies from other healthcare sectors, we seek to improve patient outcomes and optimise system performance, addressing a crucial need for innovation in trauma care operations.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>A systematic literature review was conducted using the PICOTS framework to explore operational aspects of trauma systems across varied settings, from emergency departments to specialised centres. Searches were performed in 5 databases, focussing on articles published from 2006 to 2024. Keywords related to operational research and management targeted both trauma systems and emergency management services. Our method involved identifying, synthesising, and summarising studies to evaluate operational performance, with a specific emphasis on articles that applied operational research/management techniques in trauma care. All eligible articles were critically appraised using 2 quality assessment tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Employing Donabedian's framework to analyse the quality of trauma systems through structure, process, and outcome dimensions, our systematic review included 160 studies. Of these, 5 studies discussed the application of the Donabedian evaluation framework to trauma systems, and 14 studies examined structural elements, focussing on the location of healthcare facilities, trauma resource management, and EMS logistics. The 63 studies on process indicators primarily assessed triage procedures, with some exploring the timeliness of trauma care. Meanwhile, the 78 outcome-oriented studies predominantly evaluated mortality rates, alongside a smaller number assessing functional outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Existing evaluation metrics primarily focussed on triage accuracy and mortality are inadequate. We propose expanding these metrics to include patient length of stay (LOS) and rehabilitation trajectory analyses. There is a critical gap in understanding patient flow management and long-term outcomes, necessitating focussed research on LOS modelling and improved rehabilitation data collection. Addressing these areas is essential for optimising trauma care and improving patient recovery outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72107,"journal":{"name":"Advances in rehabilitation science and practice","volume":"14 ","pages":"27536351241310645"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11742173/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in rehabilitation science and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/27536351241310645","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"0","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Trauma systems provide comprehensive care across various settings, from prehospital services to rehabilitation, integrating clinical and social care aspects. Established in the 1970s, these systems are pivotal yet under-researched in their operational management. This study aims to fill this gap by focussing on the integration of operations management (OM) techniques to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of trauma systems. By leveraging proven OM strategies from other healthcare sectors, we seek to improve patient outcomes and optimise system performance, addressing a crucial need for innovation in trauma care operations.

Methodology: A systematic literature review was conducted using the PICOTS framework to explore operational aspects of trauma systems across varied settings, from emergency departments to specialised centres. Searches were performed in 5 databases, focussing on articles published from 2006 to 2024. Keywords related to operational research and management targeted both trauma systems and emergency management services. Our method involved identifying, synthesising, and summarising studies to evaluate operational performance, with a specific emphasis on articles that applied operational research/management techniques in trauma care. All eligible articles were critically appraised using 2 quality assessment tools.

Results: Employing Donabedian's framework to analyse the quality of trauma systems through structure, process, and outcome dimensions, our systematic review included 160 studies. Of these, 5 studies discussed the application of the Donabedian evaluation framework to trauma systems, and 14 studies examined structural elements, focussing on the location of healthcare facilities, trauma resource management, and EMS logistics. The 63 studies on process indicators primarily assessed triage procedures, with some exploring the timeliness of trauma care. Meanwhile, the 78 outcome-oriented studies predominantly evaluated mortality rates, alongside a smaller number assessing functional outcomes.

Conclusion: Existing evaluation metrics primarily focussed on triage accuracy and mortality are inadequate. We propose expanding these metrics to include patient length of stay (LOS) and rehabilitation trajectory analyses. There is a critical gap in understanding patient flow management and long-term outcomes, necessitating focussed research on LOS modelling and improved rehabilitation data collection. Addressing these areas is essential for optimising trauma care and improving patient recovery outcomes.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

创伤系统的系统文献综述:从操作管理的角度。
背景:创伤系统提供各种环境下的综合护理,从院前服务到康复,整合临床和社会护理方面。这些系统建立于20世纪70年代,是关键的,但在其运营管理方面研究不足。本研究旨在通过关注手术管理(OM)技术的整合来填补这一空白,以提高创伤系统的效率和有效性。通过利用来自其他医疗保健部门的成熟的OM策略,我们寻求改善患者的治疗效果并优化系统性能,解决创伤护理操作创新的关键需求。方法:使用PICOTS框架进行了系统的文献综述,以探索从急诊科到专门中心等不同环境中创伤系统的操作方面。在5个数据库中进行了搜索,重点是2006年至2024年发表的文章。针对创伤系统和应急管理服务的运筹学与管理相关关键词。我们的方法包括识别、综合和总结研究,以评估业务绩效,特别强调在创伤护理中应用运筹学/管理技术的文章。使用2种质量评估工具对所有符合条件的文章进行严格评价。结果:采用Donabedian框架从结构、过程和结果维度分析创伤系统的质量,我们的系统综述包括160项研究。其中,5项研究讨论了Donabedian评估框架在创伤系统中的应用,14项研究检查了结构要素,重点关注医疗设施的位置、创伤资源管理和EMS物流。63项关于过程指标的研究主要评估了分诊程序,其中一些研究探索了创伤护理的及时性。与此同时,78项以结果为导向的研究主要评估了死亡率,少数研究评估了功能结果。结论:现有的评价指标主要关注分诊准确性和死亡率是不充分的。我们建议将这些指标扩展到包括患者住院时间(LOS)和康复轨迹分析。在了解患者流量管理和长期结果方面存在重大差距,需要集中研究LOS模型和改进康复数据收集。解决这些问题对于优化创伤护理和改善患者康复结果至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信