International benchmarking of tertiary trauma centers: productivity and throughput approach.

Antti Peltokorpi, Lauri Handolin, Matthias Frank, Paulus Torkki, Gerrit Matthes, Axel Ekkernkamp, Eero Hirvensalo
{"title":"International benchmarking of tertiary trauma centers: productivity and throughput approach.","authors":"Antti Peltokorpi,&nbsp;Lauri Handolin,&nbsp;Matthias Frank,&nbsp;Paulus Torkki,&nbsp;Gerrit Matthes,&nbsp;Axel Ekkernkamp,&nbsp;Eero Hirvensalo","doi":"10.1186/1752-2897-5-10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Care process in tertiary trauma centers consists of a chain of care phases in different departments from the emergency department (ED) to post-operative rehabilitation. The historical evolution of healthcare systems and organizations has led to variations in trauma patient processes in different countries. The present study is aimed at revealing differences in the throughput and productivity of trauma patient processes between German (UKB) and Finnish (HUS) tertiary trauma centers. Problems related to the comparison of different healthcare systems were also identified. The share of patients discharged was used as a control measure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The biggest differences between the hospitals were found in the use of resources in the ED and in post-operative care. Despite problems in defining comparable patients and resources, ED productivity was significantly higher in UKB. Post-operative care was, on average, 41% shorter in HUS. However, the share of patients discharged was significantly higher in UKB (96.5% vs. 68.9%). Differences were also found in the pre-operative length of stay of patients with proximal femoral fractures (UKB: 0.97 days, HUS: 1.57 days). The productivity of the operating unit was quite similar in the hospitals. In terms of ED mortality, no statistically significant differences were found.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of the present study showed significant differences in the use of resources and throughput times in trauma patient processes between Finnish and German hospitals. However, due to system-level differences between German and Finnish healthcare, the results cannot be directly transformed into development proposals for the organizations. On the other hand, in spite of certain differences regarding the healthcare systems, the demographic data of the trauma patients and medical procedures are comparable. Based on the present study, the ED process of severe trauma, pre-operative care, and operating unit processes were the most comparable parts of trauma care between the hospitals. The study also showed that the international benchmarking approach could be used to reveal bottlenecks in system-level policies and practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":87652,"journal":{"name":"Journal of trauma management & outcomes","volume":"5 ","pages":"10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1752-2897-5-10","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of trauma management & outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-2897-5-10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Care process in tertiary trauma centers consists of a chain of care phases in different departments from the emergency department (ED) to post-operative rehabilitation. The historical evolution of healthcare systems and organizations has led to variations in trauma patient processes in different countries. The present study is aimed at revealing differences in the throughput and productivity of trauma patient processes between German (UKB) and Finnish (HUS) tertiary trauma centers. Problems related to the comparison of different healthcare systems were also identified. The share of patients discharged was used as a control measure.

Results: The biggest differences between the hospitals were found in the use of resources in the ED and in post-operative care. Despite problems in defining comparable patients and resources, ED productivity was significantly higher in UKB. Post-operative care was, on average, 41% shorter in HUS. However, the share of patients discharged was significantly higher in UKB (96.5% vs. 68.9%). Differences were also found in the pre-operative length of stay of patients with proximal femoral fractures (UKB: 0.97 days, HUS: 1.57 days). The productivity of the operating unit was quite similar in the hospitals. In terms of ED mortality, no statistically significant differences were found.

Conclusions: The results of the present study showed significant differences in the use of resources and throughput times in trauma patient processes between Finnish and German hospitals. However, due to system-level differences between German and Finnish healthcare, the results cannot be directly transformed into development proposals for the organizations. On the other hand, in spite of certain differences regarding the healthcare systems, the demographic data of the trauma patients and medical procedures are comparable. Based on the present study, the ED process of severe trauma, pre-operative care, and operating unit processes were the most comparable parts of trauma care between the hospitals. The study also showed that the international benchmarking approach could be used to reveal bottlenecks in system-level policies and practices.

Abstract Image

第三创伤中心的国际基准:生产力和吞吐量方法。
背景:三级创伤中心的护理过程包括从急诊科(ED)到术后康复等不同科室的一系列护理阶段。医疗保健系统和组织的历史演变导致了不同国家创伤患者过程的变化。本研究旨在揭示德国(UKB)和芬兰(HUS)三级创伤中心之间创伤患者流程的吞吐量和生产力差异。还确定了与比较不同医疗保健系统有关的问题。出院比例作为对照指标。结果:医院间差异最大的是急诊科的资源利用和术后护理。尽管在确定可比患者和资源方面存在问题,但UKB的ED生产力明显更高。溶血性尿毒综合征患者的术后护理时间平均缩短41%。然而,UKB患者的出院比例明显更高(96.5% vs. 68.9%)。股骨近端骨折患者的术前住院时间(UKB: 0.97天,HUS: 1.57天)也存在差异。各医院手术单位的工作效率相当相似。在ED死亡率方面,没有发现统计学上的显著差异。结论:本研究的结果显示芬兰和德国医院在创伤患者处理过程中资源的使用和处理时间上存在显著差异。然而,由于德国和芬兰医疗保健系统层面的差异,研究结果不能直接转化为组织的发展建议。另一方面,尽管在医疗保健系统方面存在某些差异,但创伤患者的人口统计数据和医疗程序是可比的。根据本研究,重症创伤的急诊科流程、术前护理和手术单元流程是医院间创伤护理最具可比性的部分。该研究还表明,国际基准方法可用于揭示系统级政策和实践中的瓶颈。
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
小红书