小儿创伤中心的指定对枪伤休克的儿童有影响吗?创伤质量改善计划分析。

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Micaela K Gomez, Elizabeth C Wood, Maximilian Peter Forssten, Timothy K Williams, Sebastian Peter Forssten, Babak Sarani, Shahin Mohseni, Lucas P Neff
{"title":"小儿创伤中心的指定对枪伤休克的儿童有影响吗?创伤质量改善计划分析。","authors":"Micaela K Gomez, Elizabeth C Wood, Maximilian Peter Forssten, Timothy K Williams, Sebastian Peter Forssten, Babak Sarani, Shahin Mohseni, Lucas P Neff","doi":"10.1097/TA.0000000000004637","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recent studies have demonstrated improved outcomes for severely injured pediatric trauma patients treated at pediatric trauma centers (PTCs). Nonetheless, specific injury patterns requiring immediate lifesaving intervention may offset the recognized benefits of PTC over adult trauma centers (ATCs). This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of hypotensive pediatric trauma patients with gunshot wounds (GSWs), based on trauma center type. We hypothesize that outcomes are equivalent for this clinical scenario.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The 2013-2021 Trauma Quality Improvement Program data set was used to identify all hypotensive pediatric patients (15 years or younger) with GSWs. Hypotension was defined per Pediatric Advanced Life Support Guidelines. Patients with an Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 6 in any region and transferred patients were excluded. In order to identify the association between PTC verification status and outcomes, Poisson regression models with robust standard errors were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 687 patients met the criteria for analysis, and 236 (34%) cases were treated at PTCs. Pediatric trauma center patients were slightly younger (lower quartile, 10 vs. 12 years old; p = 0.037). There was no significant difference in Injury Severity Score or crude mortality rates (68.1% vs. 70.8%, p = 0.524). After adjusting for confounders, Poisson regression showed no reduction in in-hospital mortality, complications, failure to rescue, intensive care unit admission, or mechanical ventilation rates at PTCs compared with ATCs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Gunshot wounds in children pose unique clinical challenges. Majority of cases are cared for at ATCs. Analysis of best available data did not demonstrate a benefit to managing these patients at a PTC. Conversely, ATCs were not superior, despite managing this scenario in both adults and children more often. These findings underscore the importance of ATCs in the care of this particular injury pattern and call attention to the recent pediatric readiness requirements for American College of Surgeons (ACS)-verified trauma centers to treat pediatric firearm injuries at both PTCs and ATC.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.</p>","PeriodicalId":17453,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does pediatric trauma center designation matter for children in shock from gunshot wounds? A Trauma Quality Improvement Program analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Micaela K Gomez, Elizabeth C Wood, Maximilian Peter Forssten, Timothy K Williams, Sebastian Peter Forssten, Babak Sarani, Shahin Mohseni, Lucas P Neff\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/TA.0000000000004637\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recent studies have demonstrated improved outcomes for severely injured pediatric trauma patients treated at pediatric trauma centers (PTCs). Nonetheless, specific injury patterns requiring immediate lifesaving intervention may offset the recognized benefits of PTC over adult trauma centers (ATCs). This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of hypotensive pediatric trauma patients with gunshot wounds (GSWs), based on trauma center type. We hypothesize that outcomes are equivalent for this clinical scenario.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The 2013-2021 Trauma Quality Improvement Program data set was used to identify all hypotensive pediatric patients (15 years or younger) with GSWs. Hypotension was defined per Pediatric Advanced Life Support Guidelines. Patients with an Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 6 in any region and transferred patients were excluded. In order to identify the association between PTC verification status and outcomes, Poisson regression models with robust standard errors were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 687 patients met the criteria for analysis, and 236 (34%) cases were treated at PTCs. Pediatric trauma center patients were slightly younger (lower quartile, 10 vs. 12 years old; p = 0.037). There was no significant difference in Injury Severity Score or crude mortality rates (68.1% vs. 70.8%, p = 0.524). After adjusting for confounders, Poisson regression showed no reduction in in-hospital mortality, complications, failure to rescue, intensive care unit admission, or mechanical ventilation rates at PTCs compared with ATCs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Gunshot wounds in children pose unique clinical challenges. Majority of cases are cared for at ATCs. Analysis of best available data did not demonstrate a benefit to managing these patients at a PTC. Conversely, ATCs were not superior, despite managing this scenario in both adults and children more often. These findings underscore the importance of ATCs in the care of this particular injury pattern and call attention to the recent pediatric readiness requirements for American College of Surgeons (ACS)-verified trauma centers to treat pediatric firearm injuries at both PTCs and ATC.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17453,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-10\",\"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.0000000000004637\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"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.0000000000004637","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:最近的研究表明,在儿科创伤中心(ptc)治疗的严重创伤儿童患者的预后有所改善。尽管如此,特殊的损伤模式需要立即挽救生命的干预可能抵消了PTC比成人创伤中心(ATCs)公认的好处。本研究旨在比较枪伤(GSWs)低血压儿童创伤患者的临床结果,基于创伤中心类型。我们假设这种临床情况的结果是相同的。方法:使用2013-2021年创伤质量改善计划数据集来识别所有伴有GSWs的低血压儿童患者(15岁或以下)。低血压是根据儿科高级生命支持指南定义的。排除任何地区简略损伤量表评分为6分的患者和转院患者。为了确定PTC验证状态与结果之间的关联,使用了具有鲁棒标准误差的泊松回归模型。结果:687例患者符合分析标准,其中236例(34%)在ptc治疗。儿童创伤中心的患者年龄略小(下四分位数,10岁vs. 12岁;P = 0.037)。损伤严重程度评分和粗死亡率无显著差异(68.1%比70.8%,p = 0.524)。调整混杂因素后,泊松回归显示,与ATCs相比,ptc的住院死亡率、并发症、抢救失败、重症监护病房入院率或机械通气率均未降低。结论:儿童枪伤具有独特的临床挑战。大多数病例在空中交通管制中心得到治疗。对现有最佳数据的分析并没有证明在PTC管理这些患者有好处。相反,ATCs并不优越,尽管在成人和儿童中更经常处理这种情况。这些发现强调了ATC在治疗这种特殊伤害模式中的重要性,并引起了人们对美国外科医师学会(ACS)认证的创伤中心在PTCs和ATC治疗儿童火器伤害的最新儿科准备要求的关注。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。
Does pediatric trauma center designation matter for children in shock from gunshot wounds? A Trauma Quality Improvement Program analysis.

Background: Recent studies have demonstrated improved outcomes for severely injured pediatric trauma patients treated at pediatric trauma centers (PTCs). Nonetheless, specific injury patterns requiring immediate lifesaving intervention may offset the recognized benefits of PTC over adult trauma centers (ATCs). This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of hypotensive pediatric trauma patients with gunshot wounds (GSWs), based on trauma center type. We hypothesize that outcomes are equivalent for this clinical scenario.

Methods: The 2013-2021 Trauma Quality Improvement Program data set was used to identify all hypotensive pediatric patients (15 years or younger) with GSWs. Hypotension was defined per Pediatric Advanced Life Support Guidelines. Patients with an Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 6 in any region and transferred patients were excluded. In order to identify the association between PTC verification status and outcomes, Poisson regression models with robust standard errors were used.

Results: A total of 687 patients met the criteria for analysis, and 236 (34%) cases were treated at PTCs. Pediatric trauma center patients were slightly younger (lower quartile, 10 vs. 12 years old; p = 0.037). There was no significant difference in Injury Severity Score or crude mortality rates (68.1% vs. 70.8%, p = 0.524). After adjusting for confounders, Poisson regression showed no reduction in in-hospital mortality, complications, failure to rescue, intensive care unit admission, or mechanical ventilation rates at PTCs compared with ATCs.

Conclusion: Gunshot wounds in children pose unique clinical challenges. Majority of cases are cared for at ATCs. Analysis of best available data did not demonstrate a benefit to managing these patients at a PTC. Conversely, ATCs were not superior, despite managing this scenario in both adults and children more often. These findings underscore the importance of ATCs in the care of this particular injury pattern and call attention to the recent pediatric readiness requirements for American College of Surgeons (ACS)-verified trauma centers to treat pediatric firearm injuries at both PTCs and ATC.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

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