Trauma registry data as a tool for comparison of practice patterns and outcomes between low- and middle-income and high-income healthcare settings

Abstract

Purpose

There is a lack of data-driven, risk-adjusted mortality estimates for injured children outside of high-income countries (HIC). To inform injury prevention and quality improvement efforts, an upper middle-income country (UMIC) pediatric trauma registry was compared to that of a HIC.

Methods

Clinical data, injury details, and mortality of injured children (< 18 years) hospitalized in two centers (USA and South African (SA)) from 2013 to 2017 were abstracted. Univariate and multivariable analyses evaluated risk of mortality and were expressed as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

Of 2089 patients, SA patients had prolonged transfer times (21.1 vs 3.4 h) and were more likely referred (78.2% vs 53.9%; both p < 0.001). Penetrating injuries were more frequent in SA (23.2% vs 7.4%, p < 0.001); injury severity (9 vs 4) and shock index (0.90 vs 0.80) were greater (both p < 0.001). SA utilized cross-sectional imaging more frequently (66.4% vs 37.3%, p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was similar (1.9% SA, 1.3% USA, p = 0.31). Upon multivariable analysis, ISS > 25 [210.50 (66.0-671.0)] and penetrating injury [5.5 (1.3–23.3)] were associated with mortality, while institution [1.7 (0.7–4.2)] was not.

Conclusions

Despite transfer time, the centers demonstrated comparable survival rates. Comparison of registry data can alert clinicians to problematic practice patterns, assisting initiatives to improve trauma systems.

https://ift.tt/2NkZdb4