File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Trauma care systems: A comparison of trauma care in Victoria, Australia, and Hong Kong, China

TitleTrauma care systems: A comparison of trauma care in Victoria, Australia, and Hong Kong, China
Authors
Issue Date2008
Citation
Annals of Surgery, 2008, v. 247, n. 2, p. 335-342 How to Cite?
AbstractBACKGROUND: Despite the high incidence of major trauma, few studies have directly compared the performance of trauma systems. This study compared the trauma system performance in Victoria, Australia, (VIC) and Hong Kong, China (HK). METHODS: Prospectively collected data over 5 years from January 2001 from the 2 trauma systems were compared using univariate analysis. Variables were then entered into a multivariate logistic regression to assess differences in outcome between the systems and adjusted for effects of clinically important factors. RESULTS: Five thousand five thirty-six cases from VIC and 580 cases from HK were taken for analysis. The HK group was older, but mechanisms of injury were similar in both systems. Thoracic and abdominal trauma was more common in VIC, compared with more head injuries in HK. More patients were admitted to intensive care in VIC and patients stayed in intensive care 1 day longer on average, despite more comorbidity in HK patients. Overall mortality was 20.2% for HK and 11.9% for VIC (X1 = 32.223, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The performance of the HK trauma system was comparable to international standards, but there was a significant difference in the probability of survival of major trauma between the 2 systems. Possible modifiable factors may include criteria for activation of trauma calls and improved ICU utilization. © 2008 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/291806
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 7.5
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.729
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCheng, C. H.-
dc.contributor.authorGraham, Colin A.-
dc.contributor.authorGabbe, Belinda J.-
dc.contributor.authorYeung, Janice H.H.-
dc.contributor.authorKossmann, Thomas-
dc.contributor.authorJudson, Rodney T.-
dc.contributor.authorRainer, Timothy H.-
dc.contributor.authorCameron, Peter A.-
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-17T14:55:09Z-
dc.date.available2020-11-17T14:55:09Z-
dc.date.issued2008-
dc.identifier.citationAnnals of Surgery, 2008, v. 247, n. 2, p. 335-342-
dc.identifier.issn0003-4932-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/291806-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Despite the high incidence of major trauma, few studies have directly compared the performance of trauma systems. This study compared the trauma system performance in Victoria, Australia, (VIC) and Hong Kong, China (HK). METHODS: Prospectively collected data over 5 years from January 2001 from the 2 trauma systems were compared using univariate analysis. Variables were then entered into a multivariate logistic regression to assess differences in outcome between the systems and adjusted for effects of clinically important factors. RESULTS: Five thousand five thirty-six cases from VIC and 580 cases from HK were taken for analysis. The HK group was older, but mechanisms of injury were similar in both systems. Thoracic and abdominal trauma was more common in VIC, compared with more head injuries in HK. More patients were admitted to intensive care in VIC and patients stayed in intensive care 1 day longer on average, despite more comorbidity in HK patients. Overall mortality was 20.2% for HK and 11.9% for VIC (X1 = 32.223, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The performance of the HK trauma system was comparable to international standards, but there was a significant difference in the probability of survival of major trauma between the 2 systems. Possible modifiable factors may include criteria for activation of trauma calls and improved ICU utilization. © 2008 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofAnnals of Surgery-
dc.titleTrauma care systems: A comparison of trauma care in Victoria, Australia, and Hong Kong, China-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/SLA.0b013e31815ccc2e-
dc.identifier.pmid18216542-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-38549140025-
dc.identifier.volume247-
dc.identifier.issue2-
dc.identifier.spage335-
dc.identifier.epage342-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000252758500020-
dc.identifier.issnl0003-4932-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats