Trauma resource designation: an innovative approach to improving trauma system overtriage.
Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open · 2017-01-01 · Quasi-experimental
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Effective triage of injured patients is often a balancing act for trauma systems. As healthcare reimbursements continue to decline,1 innovative programs to effectively use hospital resources are essential in maintaining a viable trauma system. The objective of this pilot intervention was to evaluate a new triage model using 'trauma resource' (TR) as a new category in our existing Tiered Trauma Team Activation (TA) approach with hopes of decreasing charges without adversely affecting patient outcome. METHODS: Patients at one Level II Trauma Center (TC) over seven months were studied. Patients not meeting American College of Surgeons criteria for TA were assigned as TR and transported to a designated TC for expedited emergency department (ED) evaluation. Such patients were immediately assessed by a trauma nurse, ED nurse, and board-certified ED physician. Diagnostic studies were ordered, and the trauma surgeon (TS) was consulted as needed. Demographics, injury mechanism, time to physician evaluation, time to CT scan, time to disposition, hospital length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital mortality were analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty-two of the 318 TR patients were admitted by the TS and were similar to TA patients (N=684) with regard to gender, mean Injury Severity Score, mean LOS and in-hospital mortality, but were older (60.4 vs 47.2 years, p<0.0001) and often involved in a fall injury (52% vs 35%, p=0.0170). TR patients had increased door to physician evaluation times (11.5 vs 0.4 minutes, p<0.0001) and increased door to CT times (76.2 vs 25.9 minutes, p<0.0001). Of the 313 TR patients, 52 incurred charges totaling US$253 708 compared with US$1 041 612 if patients had been classified as TA. CONCLUSIONS: Designating patients as TR prehospital with expedited evaluation by an ED physician and early TS consultation resulted in reduced use of resources and lower hospital charges without increase in LOS, time to disposition or in-hospital mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Cost & cost-effectiveness · Triage instruments
Related articles
- Evaluating trauma care, outcomes and costs in a system in crisis: the necessity of a Greek National Trauma Database. (Trauma Surg Acute Care Open, 2020)
- Large cost savings realized from the 2006 Field Triage Guideline: reduction in overtriage in U.S. trauma centers. (Prehosp Emerg Care, 2012)
- Field Trauma Triage among Older Adults: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. (J Am Coll Surg, 2022)
- 13. High-sensitivity self-triage systems for safe increase of ambulance resource efficiency. (Eur J Emerg Med, 2020)
- Major Trauma Triage Tool Study (MATTS) expert consensus-derived injury assessment tool. (Br Paramed J, 2024)
- Developing a national triage tool for use in NHS regional trauma networks: the MATTS mixed methods study. (Health Technol Assess, 2026)