{"title":"创伤外科主治医生对直接进入手术室的创伤复苏进行实时评估:前瞻性观察研究的结果。","authors":"Heewon Lee,Joshua Dilday,Amelia Johnson,Andrea Kuchler,Michael Rott,Frederick Cole,Ronald Barbosa,William Long,Matthew J Martin","doi":"10.1097/ta.0000000000004447","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nDirect-to-operating room (DOR) resuscitation expedites interventions for trauma patients. Perceived benefit from the surgeon's perspective is not well known. This study assesses the integration of a real-time surgeon assessment tool into a DOR protocol.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nSurgeon assessment tool results from a prospective study of DOR cases were analyzed. Analysis assessed patient factors and surgeon perception for appropriateness and benefit of DOR. Multivariate analysis identified independent factors associated with perceived DOR benefit.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nA total of 104 trauma patients underwent DOR resuscitation; 84% were perceived as appropriate triage, and 48% as beneficial. Patients with Injury Severity Score of >15 (50% vs. 28%), systolic blood pressure of <90 mm Hg (24% vs. 9%), and severe abdominal injury (28% vs. 9%) had higher perceived DOR benefits (all p < 0.05). Patients deemed to benefit from DOR underwent more emergent interventions or truncal surgery (44% vs. 92%, p < 0.01). No difference in benefit was seen based on age, sex, Glasgow Coma Scale score of <9, or injury mechanism. Forty-four percent had perceived benefit from DOR resuscitation despite requiring imaging after initial evaluation. Patients with perceived benefit had a higher rate of unplanned return to the operating room (16% vs. 2%, p < 0.05), but no differences in complication rates, Glasgow Outcome Score, or mortality. Injury Severity Score of >15 was the only independently associated variable with a perceived benefit on surgeon assessment tool (odds ratio, 3.5; p < 0.05).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nThe majority of DOR resuscitations were deemed as appropriately triaged, and approximately half had a perceived benefit. Benefit was associated with higher injury severity and the need for urgent interventions but was not predicted by injury mechanism or other triage variables.\r\n\r\nLEVEL OF EVIDENCE\r\nPrognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.","PeriodicalId":501845,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Real-time attending trauma surgeon assessment of direct-to-operating room trauma resuscitations: Results from a prospective observational study.\",\"authors\":\"Heewon Lee,Joshua Dilday,Amelia Johnson,Andrea Kuchler,Michael Rott,Frederick Cole,Ronald Barbosa,William Long,Matthew J Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ta.0000000000004447\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\r\\nDirect-to-operating room (DOR) resuscitation expedites interventions for trauma patients. Perceived benefit from the surgeon's perspective is not well known. This study assesses the integration of a real-time surgeon assessment tool into a DOR protocol.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nSurgeon assessment tool results from a prospective study of DOR cases were analyzed. Analysis assessed patient factors and surgeon perception for appropriateness and benefit of DOR. Multivariate analysis identified independent factors associated with perceived DOR benefit.\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nA total of 104 trauma patients underwent DOR resuscitation; 84% were perceived as appropriate triage, and 48% as beneficial. Patients with Injury Severity Score of >15 (50% vs. 28%), systolic blood pressure of <90 mm Hg (24% vs. 9%), and severe abdominal injury (28% vs. 9%) had higher perceived DOR benefits (all p < 0.05). Patients deemed to benefit from DOR underwent more emergent interventions or truncal surgery (44% vs. 92%, p < 0.01). No difference in benefit was seen based on age, sex, Glasgow Coma Scale score of <9, or injury mechanism. Forty-four percent had perceived benefit from DOR resuscitation despite requiring imaging after initial evaluation. Patients with perceived benefit had a higher rate of unplanned return to the operating room (16% vs. 2%, p < 0.05), but no differences in complication rates, Glasgow Outcome Score, or mortality. Injury Severity Score of >15 was the only independently associated variable with a perceived benefit on surgeon assessment tool (odds ratio, 3.5; p < 0.05).\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSION\\r\\nThe majority of DOR resuscitations were deemed as appropriately triaged, and approximately half had a perceived benefit. Benefit was associated with higher injury severity and the need for urgent interventions but was not predicted by injury mechanism or other triage variables.\\r\\n\\r\\nLEVEL OF EVIDENCE\\r\\nPrognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501845,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ta.0000000000004447\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ta.0000000000004447","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景直接进入手术室(DOR)复苏可加快对创伤患者的干预。但从外科医生的角度来看,他们所感受到的益处并不为人所知。本研究评估了将外科医生实时评估工具纳入 DOR 方案的情况。方法分析了 DOR 病例前瞻性研究中的外科医生评估工具结果。分析评估了患者因素和外科医生对 DOR 适宜性和益处的看法。结果共有 104 名创伤患者接受了 DOR 复苏术;84% 的患者被认为是适当的分流,48% 的患者被认为是有益的。受伤严重程度评分大于 15 分的患者(50% 对 28%)、收缩压大于 15 分的患者是外科医生评估工具中唯一与获益感知相关的独立变量(几率比 3.5;P < 0.05)。获益与较高的损伤严重程度和紧急干预需求有关,但损伤机制或其他分流变量并不能预测获益。
Real-time attending trauma surgeon assessment of direct-to-operating room trauma resuscitations: Results from a prospective observational study.
BACKGROUND
Direct-to-operating room (DOR) resuscitation expedites interventions for trauma patients. Perceived benefit from the surgeon's perspective is not well known. This study assesses the integration of a real-time surgeon assessment tool into a DOR protocol.
METHODS
Surgeon assessment tool results from a prospective study of DOR cases were analyzed. Analysis assessed patient factors and surgeon perception for appropriateness and benefit of DOR. Multivariate analysis identified independent factors associated with perceived DOR benefit.
RESULTS
A total of 104 trauma patients underwent DOR resuscitation; 84% were perceived as appropriate triage, and 48% as beneficial. Patients with Injury Severity Score of >15 (50% vs. 28%), systolic blood pressure of <90 mm Hg (24% vs. 9%), and severe abdominal injury (28% vs. 9%) had higher perceived DOR benefits (all p < 0.05). Patients deemed to benefit from DOR underwent more emergent interventions or truncal surgery (44% vs. 92%, p < 0.01). No difference in benefit was seen based on age, sex, Glasgow Coma Scale score of <9, or injury mechanism. Forty-four percent had perceived benefit from DOR resuscitation despite requiring imaging after initial evaluation. Patients with perceived benefit had a higher rate of unplanned return to the operating room (16% vs. 2%, p < 0.05), but no differences in complication rates, Glasgow Outcome Score, or mortality. Injury Severity Score of >15 was the only independently associated variable with a perceived benefit on surgeon assessment tool (odds ratio, 3.5; p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
The majority of DOR resuscitations were deemed as appropriately triaged, and approximately half had a perceived benefit. Benefit was associated with higher injury severity and the need for urgent interventions but was not predicted by injury mechanism or other triage variables.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.