Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Objective model to facilitate designation of military–civilian partnership hospitals for sustainment of military trauma readiness
  1. Andrew Hall1,
  2. Iram Qureshi2,
  3. Stacy Shackelford3,
  4. Jacob Glaser2,
  5. Eileen M Bulger4,
  6. Thomas Scalea5,
  7. Jennifer Gurney3
  1. 1 Center for the Sustainment of Trauma and Readiness Skills - St. Louis, Saint Louis University Hospital, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
  2. 2 Naval Medical Research Unit San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
  3. 3 Joint Trauma System, Defense Center of Excellence, San Antonio, Texas, USA
  4. 4 Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
  5. 5 R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Andrew Hall, Surgery, Saint Louis University Hospital, Saint Louis, MO 63110-0250, USA; andrew.hall{at}health.slu.edu

Abstract

Background A major dilemma of the military surgeon is the requirement for battlefield trauma expertise without regular exposure to a traumatically injured patient. To solve this problem, the military is partnering with civilian trauma centers to obtain the required trauma exposure. The main objective of this article is to quantify institutional differences and develop a predictive model for estimating the number of 24-hour trauma shifts a surgeon must be on call at civilian centers to experience urgent trauma cases.

Methods Trauma databases from multiple institutions were queried to obtain all urgent trauma cases occurring during a 2-year period. A predictive model was used to estimate the number of urgent surgical cases in multiple specialties surgeons would experience over various numbers of 24-hour shifts and the number of 24-hour shifts required to experience a defined number of cases.

Results Institution 1 had the lowest number of required 24-hour shifts to experience 10 urgent operative cases for general/trauma surgery (10 calls) and orthopedic surgery (6 calls) and the highest number of predicted cases over 12 days, 18.3 (95% CI 11 to 27), with 95% confidence. The expected trauma cases and 24-hour shifts at Institution 1 were statistically significant (p<0.0001). There were seasonal effects at all institutions except for Institution 3.

Discussion There are significant variabilities in trauma center volume and therefore, the expected number of shifts and cases during a specific period of time is significantly different between trauma centers. This predictive model is objective and can therefore be used as an extrapolative tool to help and inform the military regarding placement of personnel in optimal centers for trauma currency rotations.

Level of evidence Economic and value-based evaluations, level II.

  • surgical training
  • trauma
  • critical care
  • military

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors AH, IQ, JGl and JGu contributed to planning, conduct, and reporting of the work. SS, EMB, and TS contributed to conduct and reporting of the work.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Disclaimer The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Air Force, the Department of Defense, or the USA Government.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.