评估卫生保健中的创伤意识:来自AAST和创伤预防联盟调查的见解。

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
June Yao, Jeffry Nahmias, Glen Tinkoff, Deborah A Kuhls, Graal Diaz, Stephanie Bonne, Leah Tatebe, Alexis Moren, Kristen Carter, Christine Castater, Carlos Palacio-Lascano, Sue Prentiss, Thomas K Duncan
{"title":"评估卫生保健中的创伤意识:来自AAST和创伤预防联盟调查的见解。","authors":"June Yao, Jeffry Nahmias, Glen Tinkoff, Deborah A Kuhls, Graal Diaz, Stephanie Bonne, Leah Tatebe, Alexis Moren, Kristen Carter, Christine Castater, Carlos Palacio-Lascano, Sue Prentiss, Thomas K Duncan","doi":"10.1097/TA.0000000000004546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Trauma-informed care (TIC) is a framework designed to understand and address the impacts of trauma, ensuring physical, psychological, and emotional safety for all involved. It seeks to prevent retraumatization and promote a sense of control and empowerment across diverse populations.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This Trauma Prevention Coalition survey study assessed TIC implementation among members from 13 of the 16 participating organizations, focusing on prevalence, awareness, and training gaps.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 948 participants, 91% (n = 861) were affiliated with trauma centers. In adult trauma centers: 19.3% were from Level I, 9.4% from Level II, 5.4% from Level III, 3.1% from Level IV, and 1.2% from Level V. In addition, 1.2% were from nonadult trauma centers, and 2.5% worked in centers serving both adult and pediatric patients. In pediatric centers: 18.6% were from Level I, 13.0% from Level II, 1% from Level III, and 67.0% from nonpediatric centers. Trauma-informed care principles were integrated into the core values of 35.5% of trauma centers, while 64.5% had not adopted them. Only 17.0% had TIC training plans, with 57.7% lacking or unaware of such plans. Bivariate regression analysis indicated that TIC integration decreased for Level II, Level IV, and nontrauma centers compared with Level I adult trauma centers, but increased for Level III. In pediatric centers, TIC integration decreased for Level II, Level III, Level IV, and nontrauma centers compared with Level I. Pediatric trauma centers showed a higher TIC integration rate (71.6%) compared with adult centers (39.4%, p < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TIC adoption varies significantly across trauma center levels, with higher prevalence in pediatric and Level I centers. The study underscores the need for comprehensive TIC training within trauma care systems.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic/care management; Level IV.</p>","PeriodicalId":17453,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"729-733"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating trauma awareness in health care: Insights from the AAST and Trauma Prevention Coalition Survey.\",\"authors\":\"June Yao, Jeffry Nahmias, Glen Tinkoff, Deborah A Kuhls, Graal Diaz, Stephanie Bonne, Leah Tatebe, Alexis Moren, Kristen Carter, Christine Castater, Carlos Palacio-Lascano, Sue Prentiss, Thomas K Duncan\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/TA.0000000000004546\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Trauma-informed care (TIC) is a framework designed to understand and address the impacts of trauma, ensuring physical, psychological, and emotional safety for all involved. It seeks to prevent retraumatization and promote a sense of control and empowerment across diverse populations.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This Trauma Prevention Coalition survey study assessed TIC implementation among members from 13 of the 16 participating organizations, focusing on prevalence, awareness, and training gaps.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 948 participants, 91% (n = 861) were affiliated with trauma centers. In adult trauma centers: 19.3% were from Level I, 9.4% from Level II, 5.4% from Level III, 3.1% from Level IV, and 1.2% from Level V. In addition, 1.2% were from nonadult trauma centers, and 2.5% worked in centers serving both adult and pediatric patients. In pediatric centers: 18.6% were from Level I, 13.0% from Level II, 1% from Level III, and 67.0% from nonpediatric centers. Trauma-informed care principles were integrated into the core values of 35.5% of trauma centers, while 64.5% had not adopted them. Only 17.0% had TIC training plans, with 57.7% lacking or unaware of such plans. Bivariate regression analysis indicated that TIC integration decreased for Level II, Level IV, and nontrauma centers compared with Level I adult trauma centers, but increased for Level III. In pediatric centers, TIC integration decreased for Level II, Level III, Level IV, and nontrauma centers compared with Level I. Pediatric trauma centers showed a higher TIC integration rate (71.6%) compared with adult centers (39.4%, p < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TIC adoption varies significantly across trauma center levels, with higher prevalence in pediatric and Level I centers. The study underscores the need for comprehensive TIC training within trauma care systems.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic/care management; Level IV.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17453,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"729-733\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004546\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004546","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:创伤知情护理(TIC)是一个旨在理解和处理创伤影响的框架,确保所有相关人员的身体、心理和情感安全。它力求防止再创伤,并在不同人群中促进控制感和赋权。方法:本创伤预防联盟调查研究评估了来自16个参与组织中的13个成员的TIC实施情况,重点关注流行程度、意识和培训差距。结果:在948名参与者中,91% (n = 861)隶属于创伤中心。在成人创伤中心:19.3%来自一级,9.4%来自二级,5.4%来自三级,3.1%来自四级,1.2%来自五级。此外,1.2%来自非成人创伤中心,2.5%在同时服务成人和儿科患者的中心工作。在儿科中心:18.6%来自一级,13.0%来自二级,1%来自三级,67.0%来自非儿科中心。35.5%的创伤护理中心将创伤知情原则纳入核心价值观,64.5%的创伤护理中心未将其纳入核心价值观。只有17.0%有议会培训计划,57.7%没有或不知道有培训计划。双变量回归分析表明,与一级成人创伤中心相比,二级、四级和非创伤中心的TIC整合程度有所下降,而三级成人创伤中心的TIC整合程度有所增加。在儿科中心,II级、III级、IV级和非创伤中心的TIC整合率均低于i级。与成人中心相比,创伤儿童中心的TIC整合率(71.6%)高于成人中心(39.4%,p < 0.01)。结论:不同级别创伤中心的TIC使用率差异显著,儿科和一级创伤中心的TIC使用率更高。该研究强调了在创伤护理系统中进行综合TIC培训的必要性。证据水平:治疗/护理管理;第三层次。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating trauma awareness in health care: Insights from the AAST and Trauma Prevention Coalition Survey.

Background: Trauma-informed care (TIC) is a framework designed to understand and address the impacts of trauma, ensuring physical, psychological, and emotional safety for all involved. It seeks to prevent retraumatization and promote a sense of control and empowerment across diverse populations.

Method: This Trauma Prevention Coalition survey study assessed TIC implementation among members from 13 of the 16 participating organizations, focusing on prevalence, awareness, and training gaps.

Results: Out of 948 participants, 91% (n = 861) were affiliated with trauma centers. In adult trauma centers: 19.3% were from Level I, 9.4% from Level II, 5.4% from Level III, 3.1% from Level IV, and 1.2% from Level V. In addition, 1.2% were from nonadult trauma centers, and 2.5% worked in centers serving both adult and pediatric patients. In pediatric centers: 18.6% were from Level I, 13.0% from Level II, 1% from Level III, and 67.0% from nonpediatric centers. Trauma-informed care principles were integrated into the core values of 35.5% of trauma centers, while 64.5% had not adopted them. Only 17.0% had TIC training plans, with 57.7% lacking or unaware of such plans. Bivariate regression analysis indicated that TIC integration decreased for Level II, Level IV, and nontrauma centers compared with Level I adult trauma centers, but increased for Level III. In pediatric centers, TIC integration decreased for Level II, Level III, Level IV, and nontrauma centers compared with Level I. Pediatric trauma centers showed a higher TIC integration rate (71.6%) compared with adult centers (39.4%, p < 0.01).

Conclusion: TIC adoption varies significantly across trauma center levels, with higher prevalence in pediatric and Level I centers. The study underscores the need for comprehensive TIC training within trauma care systems.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic/care management; Level IV.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
11.80%
发文量
637
审稿时长
2.7 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery® is designed to provide the scientific basis to optimize care of the severely injured and critically ill surgical patient. Thus, the Journal has a high priority for basic and translation research to fulfill this objectives. Additionally, the Journal is enthusiastic to publish randomized prospective clinical studies to establish care predicated on a mechanistic foundation. Finally, the Journal is seeking systematic reviews, guidelines and algorithms that incorporate the best evidence available.
×
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