Citation

Nathens AB, Maier RV. Adv. Surg. 2001; 35: 61-75.

Affiliation

University of Washington, Division of General/Trauma Surgery, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2001, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

11579818

Abstract

In spite of the limited direct evidence available, increasing data support a positive volume-outcome association in trauma care. When coupled with the extensive indirect data suggesting that regions with organized systems of trauma care are associated with lower trauma-related mortality rates than regions where the number of centers and their level of commitment are unlimited and untested, there is little doubt that experience improves outcome and that volume plays a critical role in the accrual of experience. Although regionalization of trauma care has the inevitable consequence of increased prehospital transport times, particularly in rural areas remote from large trauma centers, some states have designed inclusive systems where a large number of smaller centers have been verified and designated as lower level trauma centers (i.e., level 3-5). The process of trauma center verification holds these smaller volume centers to a standard of care such that the quality of care of the trauma patient may exceed that of other, less-regulated aspects of medical or surgical care. Several reports have suggested that trauma outcomes in smaller rural level 3 centers or centers with dedicated trauma programs with appropriate, functional triage protocols are comparable to national norms, thus reflecting the importance of commitment to outcome. These data suggest that quality of care does not only follow volume, particularly when stipulations and requirements are clear regarding the process of care and ongoing quality assurance.

Language: en