• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.241-247
• /
• 2015

Purpose: To evaluate the influence of how the trauma care system is applied on the management of trauma patients. Methods: We divided the patients into a pre-trauma system group and a post-trauma system group according to the time when we began to apply the trauma care system in our institution. We compared the general characteristics, injury severity score, initial response time to the trauma patients, number of preventable deaths, and clinical outcomes between the two groups. Results: The numbers of patients in the pre-trauma system group and the post-trauma system group were 188 and 257, respectively. No differences in the patient's median ages, trauma scores (ISS, RTS, TRISS) and proportions of severe trauma patients (ISS>15) were observed between the two groups. The number and the proportion of patients who were admitted to our hospital were increased in the post-trauma system group. The time interval from trauma CP activation to emergency surgery or angio-embolization, and the patient's time spent in emergency room were shortened in the post-trauma system group. However, the lengths of the ICU stay and the hospital stay, and the number of in-hospital mortalities were not improved in the post-trauma system group. In severe trauma patients (ISS>15), there were no differences between the two groups in the number and the proportion of admitted patients, and the time interval from trauma CP activation to performing a diagnostic and therapeutic procedure was not shortened in the post-trauma system group. Conclusion: Application of the trauma care system has shortened the time between the initial response and patient management. However, this improvement was not enough to result in better clinical outcomes. More trauma physicians, multidisciplinary cooperation, and a well-organized trauma management process will be needed if the maximum efficacy of the trauma system is to be achieved.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• v.27 no.4
• /
• pp.165-169
• /
• 2014

Purpose: Trauma is one of the most common and lethal causes of death in Korea, especially in people under the age of 40. However, a considerable percentage of trauma patients are lost each year due to the scarce resources of the trauma system. The purpose of this study was to determine the recognition of trauma and trauma system. Methods: From April 8th to 22nd, 2014, visitors and in-patients in our medical center were interviewed and surveyed with a questionnaire, which included 28 questions regarding the trauma system, such as the most common cause of death, the locations of trauma centers, the importance of trauma centers, and consent for supporting trauma centers financially. Results: The majority of the respondents recognized trauma as a common cause of death; this was particularly true for people younger than 40. Most respondents' expectancy for the optimal time for trauma patient transport was high, recognizing that major trauma patients should receive urgent care. The respondents felt that trauma centers are important and needed, just as much as police stations and libraries are. Among 178 respondents, 140 (80.5%) were willing to financially support the trauma system. Conclusion: The respondents were aware of the seriousness of trauma and generally agreed on the need for trauma centers. In order to meet the needs and the demands of the people, and to reduce preventable death rate, the trauma system should be improved not only in quality but also in quantity with better and more facilities and manpower, with the aid of publicity from trauma organizations and funding from the government.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• v.29 no.4
• /
• pp.155-160
• /
• 2016

Purpose: Two years have passed since a level I trauma center was officially opened in the Gacheon Gil Hospital, South Korea. We analyzed 2014 and 2015 registered patient data from the Korean Trauma Data Base (KTDB) to identify trends in trauma patient care and factors that influence the quality of trauma care at the Gacheon Gil trauma center. Methods: Data was extracted from the KTDB included patient age, sex, systolic blood pressure at emergency room arrival, revised trauma score, injury severity score, trauma injury severity score, transfusion amount, and the cause of death was analyzed. Results: A total of 3269 trauma patients were admitted to our trauma center in 2014 and 3225 in 2015. Demographics and mechanism of injury were not significantly different between years. The severity of trauma injury was decreased in 2015 although the mortality rate was slightly increased. This requires further analysis. Conclusion: The aim of this study was to determine the general status and trends in trauma incidence and management outcomes for the Incheon area. We noted no significant changes in trauma status from 2014 to 2015. We need to collect and review trauma patient data over a long period in order to elucidate trauma incidence and management trends in the trauma field. Finally, studies using trauma patient data will indicate appropriate quality control factors for trauma care and help to improve the quality of trauma management.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• v.28 no.3
• /
• pp.123-128
• /
• 2015

Purpose: Establishment of the trauma system changed quality of trauma care in many countries. As one of the first designated level 1 trauma center in Korea, we analyzed trauma registration data in 2014. Methods: Data was extracted from Korean Trauma Data Base (KTDB) that was started from august 2013. Variables related to demographics and trauma was collected through the year 2014. Results: There were 3269 trauma patients who admitted to our hospital and registered to KTDB in 2014. Median age was 49 years, 64.4% were men, and 90% of patients were blunt in mechanism. Median injury severity score (ISS) was 5, mean revised trauma score (RTS) was 7.65. There were 138 (4.2%) deaths and 87 (2.7%) patients of them was death after admission. Conclusion: This is the first report using KTDB registration from our institution. Trauma volume is appropriate but it should be compared with other trauma centers in Korea. In future national analysis of KTDB is mandatory.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.71-74
• /
• 2015

Penetrating neck trauma involving spinal cord injury is relatively uncommon, but can be life-threatening. We report a case of 59-year-old female who presented with hypotension after stab injury self-inflicted with a scissor to her neck. Although Open removal of the scissor and control of bleeding were successfully done, penetration of spinal cord resulted in a neurologic impairment.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.1-7
• /
• 2019

Purpose: The present study aimed to evaluate the influence of how the trauma care system applied on the management of trauma patient within the region. Methods: We divided the patients in a pre-trauma system group and a post-trauma system group according to the time when we began to apply the trauma care system in the Halla Hospital after designation of a trauma center. We compared annual general characteristics, injury severity score, the average numbers of the major trauma patients, clinical outcomes of the emergency department, and mortality rates between the two groups. Results: No significant differences were found in the annual patients' average age ($54.1{\pm}20.0$ vs. $52.8{\pm}18.2$, p=0.201), transportation pathways (p=0.462), injury mechanism (p=0.486), injury severity score (22.93 vs. 23.96, p=0.877), emergency room (ER) stay in minutes (199.17 vs. 194.29, p=0.935), time to operation or procedure in minutes (154.07 vs. 142.1, p=0.767), time interval to intensive care unit (ICU) in minutes (219.54 vs. 237.13, p=0.662). The W score and Z score indicated better outcomes in post-trauma system group than in pre-trauma system group (W scores, 2.186 vs. 2.027; Z scores, 2.189 vs. 1.928). However, when analyzing survival rates for each department, in the neurosurgery department, in comparison with W score and Z score, both W score were positive and Z core was higher than +1.96. (pre-trauma group: 3.426, 2.335 vs. post-trauma group: 4.17, 1.967). In other than the neurosurgery department, W score was positive after selection, but Z score was less than +1.96, which is not a meaningful outcome of treatment (pre-trauma group: -0.358, -0.271 vs. post-trauma group: 1.071, 0.958). Conclusions: There were significant increases in patient numbers and improvement in survival rate after the introduction of the trauma system. However, there were no remarkable change in ER stay, time to ICU admission, time interval to emergent procedure or operation, and survival rates except neurosurgery. To achieve meaningful survival rates and the result of the rise of the trauma index, we will need to secure sufficient manpower, including specialists in various surgical area as well as rapid establishment of the trauma center.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.19-25
• /
• 2007

Purpose: Trauma surgery is not an official medical specialty in the Republic of Korea (South Korea). Thus, a trauma victim transported to an emergency room (ER) is resuscitated and surveyed by an intern, a resident, or an emergency physician (EP) at first. Currently an operative management is decreasing because of multiple factors. Nevertheless, trauma surgery is the key for some patients. Does the EP's treatment in the ER delay the surgeon's emergency operation? Methods: A retrospective study was performed for trauma victims who underwent trauma surgery from March 2004 to February 2005 in a local emergency center of Daegu-city. We reviewed the medical records and analyzed the trauma victim's age, sex, cause of injury, method of transport, time from the trauma to the operation, EP's treatment, surgical department, mortality, and injury severity score (ISS). Results: Of the 223 trauma victims included in this study, males were predominant (83.4%). The mean age was 37.98 years of age. The main Causes of trauma were trauma NOS (not otherwise specified) and motor vehicle accidents (MVA). The main methods of transport was privately owned automobile. The mean time from trauma to operation was 617.46 min. The mean ISS was 7.67. Trauma surgery with the EP's treatment group included 40 trauma victims with higher ISS, and the time from trauma to operation was shorter than it was for the 183 trauma victims not in that group. Conclusion: The EP's treatment of high-ISS multiple-injury trauma victims can shorten the time from trauma to trauma surgery and will help the surgical department treatment. In the trauma care system of the Republic of Korea, and increased role should be encouraged for emergency physician.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.71-75
• /
• 2022

Trauma care is evolving throughout the world to meet the demand resulting from rapidly increasing rates of mortality and morbidity related to external injuries. The State Major Trauma Service was designated to Royal Perth Hospital in 2004 to provide comprehensive care for trauma patients in Western Australia (WA), which is the largest state by area in the country. The State Major Trauma Unit, which was established in 2008, functions as a level I center and admits over 1,000 major trauma patients per year, making it the second busiest trauma center in Australia. The importance of recording data related to trauma was identified by the trauma service in WA to inspire higher standards of patient care and injury prevention. In 1994, the service established a trauma registry, which has undergone significant changes over the last two decades. The current State Trauma Registry is linked to a statewide database called the Data Linkage System. The linked data are available for policy development, quality assurance, and research. This article discusses the evolution of the trauma service and the registry database in the WA health system. The State Trauma Registry has enormous potential to contribute to research and quality improvement studies along with its ability to link with other databases.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.66 no.1
• /
• pp.63-71
• /
• 2023

Objective : Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the most common injuries in patients with multiple trauma, and it associates with high post-traumatic mortality and morbidity. A trauma center was established to provide optimal treatment for patients with severe trauma. This study aimed to compare the treatment outcomes of patients with severe TBI between non-trauma and trauma centers based on data from the Korean Neuro-Trauma Data Bank System (KNTDBS). Methods : From January 2018 to June 2021, 1122 patients were enrolled in the KNTDBS study. Among them, 253 patients from non-traumatic centers and 253 from trauma centers were matched using propensity score analysis. We evaluated baseline characteristics, the time required from injury to hospital arrival, surgery-related factors, neuromonitoring, and outcomes. Results : The time from injury to hospital arrival was shorter in the non-trauma centers (110.2 vs. 176.1 minutes, p=0.012). The operation time was shorter in the trauma centers (156.7 vs. 128.1 minutes, p=0.003). Neuromonitoring was performed in nine patients (3.6%) in the non-trauma centers and 67 patients (26.5%) in the trauma centers (p<0.001). Mortality rates were lower in trauma centers than in non-trauma centers (58.5% vs. 47.0%, p=0.014). The average Glasgow coma scale (GCS) at discharge was higher in the trauma centers (4.3 vs. 5.7, p=0.011). For the Glasgow outcome scale-extended (GOSE) at discharge, the favorable outcome (GOSE 5-8) was 17.4% in the non-trauma centers and 27.3% in the trauma centers (p=0.014). Conclusion : This study showed lower mortality rates, higher GCS scores at discharge, and higher rates of favorable outcomes in trauma centers than in non-trauma centers. The regional trauma medical system seems to have a positive impact in treating patients with severe TBI.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• v.37 no.1
• /
• pp.28-36
• /
• 2024

Purpose: Recent advancements in interventional radiology have made angioembolization an invaluable modality in trauma care. Angioembolization is typically performed by interventional radiologists. In this study, we aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of emergency angioembolization performed by trauma surgeons. Methods: We identified trauma patients who underwent emergency angiography due to significant trauma-related hemorrhage between January 2020 and June 2023 at Jeju Regional Trauma Center. Until May 2022, two dedicated interventional radiologists performed emergency angiography at our center. However, since June 2022, a trauma surgeon with a background and experience in vascular surgery has performed emergency angiography for trauma-related bleeding. The indications for trauma surgeon-performed angiography included significant hemorrhage from liver injury, pelvic injury, splenic injury, or kidney injury. We assessed the angiography results according to the operator of the initial angiographic procedure. The term "failure of the first angioembolization" was defined as rebleeding from any cause, encompassing patients who underwent either re-embolization due to rebleeding or surgery due to rebleeding. Results: No significant differences were found between the interventional radiologists and the trauma surgeon in terms of re-embolization due to rebleeding, surgery due to rebleeding, or the overall failure rate of the first angioembolization. Mortality and morbidity rates were also similar between the two groups. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis evaluating failure after the first angioembolization, pelvic embolization emerged as the sole significant risk factor (adjusted odds ratio, 3.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-10.33; P=0.041). Trauma surgeon-performed angioembolization was not deemed a significant risk factor in the multivariable logistic regression model. Conclusions: Trauma surgeons, when equipped with the necessary endovascular skills and experience, can safely perform angioembolization. To further improve quality control, an enhanced training curriculum for trauma surgeons is warranted.