4.1 Article

High duality acute care for the severely injured is not consistently available in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: Report of a survey by the Trauma committee, The Royal College of Surgeons of England

Journal

Publisher

ROYAL COLL SURGEONS ENGLAND
DOI: 10.1308/003588406X94850

Keywords

trauma; severe injury; acute care; survey

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

INTRODUCTION A survey was undertaken to determine the extent to which acute hospitals in England, Wales and Northern Ireland were meeting the acute trauma management standards published in 2000 by The Royal College of Surgeons of England and the British Orthopaedic Association. METHODS A questionnaire comprising 72 questions in 16 categories of management was distributed in July 2003 to all eligible hospitals via the link network of the British Orthopaedic Association. Data were collected over a 3-month period. RESULTS Of 213 eligible hospitals, 161 (76%) responded. In every category of acute care, failure to meet the standards was reported. Only 34 (21%) hospitals met all the 13 indicative standards that were considered pivotal to good trauma care, but all hospitals met at least 7 of these standards. Failures were usually in the organisation of services rather than a lack of resources, with the exception of the inadequate capacity for admission to specialist neurosurgery units. A minority of hospitals reported an inability to provide emergency airway control or insertion of chest tube. The data have not been verified and deficiencies in reporting cannot be excluded. CONCLUSIONS The findings of this survey suggest that high quality care for the severely injured is not available consistently across England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and appear to justify concerns about the ability of the NHS to deal effectively with the current trauma workload and the consequences of a major incident.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available