Assessment of the Suitability of Trauma Triage According to Physiological Criteria in Korea

G. Kim, Jae Hun Kim, Hohyun Kim, Seon Hee Kim, Sung Jin Park, Sang Bong Lee, C. Park, Dongyeon Ryu, K. Lee, S. Kim, N. Lee, I. Wang
{"title":"Assessment of the Suitability of Trauma Triage According to Physiological Criteria in Korea","authors":"G. Kim, Jae Hun Kim, Hohyun Kim, Seon Hee Kim, Sung Jin Park, Sang Bong Lee, C. Park, Dongyeon Ryu, K. Lee, S. Kim, N. Lee, I. Wang","doi":"10.17479/jacs.2022.12.3.120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: A trauma center project for treating patients with trauma has been established in Korea. A trauma team is activated based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) field triage Step 1 for patient triage. Here, we determined if the currently applied criteria were appropriate for the triage of patients with trauma in Korea.Methods: This retrospective study included patients who were taken to the regional trauma center from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019, and were registered in the Korean Trauma database. The rates for undertriage and overtriage were calculated from the in-field and in-hospital triage according to the CDC guidelines Step 1.Results: Among the 9,383 patients transferred to the trauma center, 3,423 were directly transferred from the site and were investigated. The overall rates for undertriage and overtriage of these patients were 28.13% and 30.35%, respectively. For the patients who received in-field triage and were directly transferred to the trauma center, the rates for undertriage and overtriage were 27.92% and 32.39%, and 25.92% and 29.11% for in-hospital triage, respectively. The concordance rate of triage was 87.09%.Conclusion: The current use of in-hospital triage physiological criteria as set out in the CDC guidelines Step 1, indicated an undertriage rate which was high and an overtriage rate within the acceptable range. Further studies on triaging patients with trauma are warranted. Improvements in the guidelines of the trauma center project are necessary and this needs to be supported by resources and training for field personnel.","PeriodicalId":34662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Acute Care Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Acute Care Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17479/jacs.2022.12.3.120","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: A trauma center project for treating patients with trauma has been established in Korea. A trauma team is activated based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) field triage Step 1 for patient triage. Here, we determined if the currently applied criteria were appropriate for the triage of patients with trauma in Korea.Methods: This retrospective study included patients who were taken to the regional trauma center from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019, and were registered in the Korean Trauma database. The rates for undertriage and overtriage were calculated from the in-field and in-hospital triage according to the CDC guidelines Step 1.Results: Among the 9,383 patients transferred to the trauma center, 3,423 were directly transferred from the site and were investigated. The overall rates for undertriage and overtriage of these patients were 28.13% and 30.35%, respectively. For the patients who received in-field triage and were directly transferred to the trauma center, the rates for undertriage and overtriage were 27.92% and 32.39%, and 25.92% and 29.11% for in-hospital triage, respectively. The concordance rate of triage was 87.09%.Conclusion: The current use of in-hospital triage physiological criteria as set out in the CDC guidelines Step 1, indicated an undertriage rate which was high and an overtriage rate within the acceptable range. Further studies on triaging patients with trauma are warranted. Improvements in the guidelines of the trauma center project are necessary and this needs to be supported by resources and training for field personnel.
韩国根据生理学标准进行创伤分类的适宜性评估
目的:在韩国建立了一个治疗创伤患者的创伤中心项目。根据疾病控制和预防中心(CDC)现场分诊步骤1,启动创伤小组进行患者分诊。在这里,我们确定目前适用的标准是否适用于韩国创伤患者的分类。方法:回顾性研究纳入2016年1月1日至2019年12月31日地区创伤中心收治的患者,并在韩国创伤数据库中登记。根据CDC指南第1步,从现场和医院分诊中计算出分诊不足和分诊过度的比率。结果:在转入创伤中心的9383例患者中,有3423例是直接从创伤中心转移过来的。总分诊不足率为28.13%,分诊过多率为30.35%。在接受现场分诊和直接转至创伤中心的患者中,分诊不足率和分诊过多率分别为27.92%和32.39%,院内分诊不足率和分诊过多率分别为25.92%和29.11%。分类符合率为87.09%。结论:按照CDC指南第1步的规定,目前使用的住院分诊生理标准显示分诊不足率较高,分诊过度率在可接受范围内。对创伤患者分诊的进一步研究是有必要的。改进创伤中心项目的指导方针是必要的,这需要得到现场人员的资源和培训的支持。
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
16
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信