ACS verified level I centers have better clinical outcomes than state designated level I trauma centers

Vaidehi Agrawal, Paul J. Deramo, Emily Lowrance, Chanhee Jo Chae, Joseph Darryl Amos

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Two systems exist for evaluating the abilities of trauma centers: the American College of Surgeons' (ACS) verification and the State's designation. Given criteria variations between the two systems, we studied clinical outcome variations of the same. Methods: The National Trauma Databank was queried from 2002 - 2009, 2013 & 2014 for all patients admitted to a State designated (SI) or ACS verified (AI) trauma facility. Centers that were exclusively state or ACS designated were used for analysis. Patient demographics, facility information and physiological variables were obtained. Outcome variables included length of stay, no of patients with complications and mortality. Multivariate logistic or linear regression analyses were employed for assessing outcome variations. Results: Of the 12,581,375 trauma admissions, 1,504,848 (12%) met the inclusion criteria with 15 AI and 94 SI exclusive facilities identified. Patient demographics were 66% male, 62 - 63% white and 81% blunt injury. Higher length of stay, mortality, and complications were noted in SI vs. AI centers. Conclusions: Our results indicate ACS verified level I trauma centers have better clinical outcomes than State designated level I trauma centers. This study warrants future prospective studies to determine the impact of level of designation on clinical outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere14435
JournalTrauma Monthly
Volume23
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2018
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Trauma Centers
Length of Stay
Wounds and Injuries
Demography
Nonpenetrating Wounds
Mortality
Linear Models
Logistic Models
Regression Analysis
Databases
Prospective Studies
Surgeons

Keywords

  • Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
  • Public Health Systems Research
  • Quality of Health Care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

ACS verified level I centers have better clinical outcomes than state designated level I trauma centers. / Agrawal, Vaidehi; Deramo, Paul J.; Lowrance, Emily; Chae, Chanhee Jo; Amos, Joseph Darryl.

In: Trauma Monthly, Vol. 23, No. 6, e14435, 01.11.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Agrawal, Vaidehi ; Deramo, Paul J. ; Lowrance, Emily ; Chae, Chanhee Jo ; Amos, Joseph Darryl. / ACS verified level I centers have better clinical outcomes than state designated level I trauma centers. In: Trauma Monthly. 2018 ; Vol. 23, No. 6.
@article{602d115997bc4e588d2b5e171dc2b04e,
title = "ACS verified level I centers have better clinical outcomes than state designated level I trauma centers",
abstract = "Background: Two systems exist for evaluating the abilities of trauma centers: the American College of Surgeons' (ACS) verification and the State's designation. Given criteria variations between the two systems, we studied clinical outcome variations of the same. Methods: The National Trauma Databank was queried from 2002 - 2009, 2013 & 2014 for all patients admitted to a State designated (SI) or ACS verified (AI) trauma facility. Centers that were exclusively state or ACS designated were used for analysis. Patient demographics, facility information and physiological variables were obtained. Outcome variables included length of stay, no of patients with complications and mortality. Multivariate logistic or linear regression analyses were employed for assessing outcome variations. Results: Of the 12,581,375 trauma admissions, 1,504,848 (12{\%}) met the inclusion criteria with 15 AI and 94 SI exclusive facilities identified. Patient demographics were 66{\%} male, 62 - 63{\%} white and 81{\%} blunt injury. Higher length of stay, mortality, and complications were noted in SI vs. AI centers. Conclusions: Our results indicate ACS verified level I trauma centers have better clinical outcomes than State designated level I trauma centers. This study warrants future prospective studies to determine the impact of level of designation on clinical outcomes.",
keywords = "Outcome Assessment (Health Care), Public Health Systems Research, Quality of Health Care",
author = "Vaidehi Agrawal and Deramo, {Paul J.} and Emily Lowrance and Chae, {Chanhee Jo} and Amos, {Joseph Darryl}",
year = "2018",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5812/traumamon.14435",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
journal = "Trauma Monthly",
issn = "2251-7464",
publisher = "Kowsar Publishing Company",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - ACS verified level I centers have better clinical outcomes than state designated level I trauma centers

AU - Agrawal, Vaidehi

AU - Deramo, Paul J.

AU - Lowrance, Emily

AU - Chae, Chanhee Jo

AU - Amos, Joseph Darryl

PY - 2018/11/1

Y1 - 2018/11/1

N2 - Background: Two systems exist for evaluating the abilities of trauma centers: the American College of Surgeons' (ACS) verification and the State's designation. Given criteria variations between the two systems, we studied clinical outcome variations of the same. Methods: The National Trauma Databank was queried from 2002 - 2009, 2013 & 2014 for all patients admitted to a State designated (SI) or ACS verified (AI) trauma facility. Centers that were exclusively state or ACS designated were used for analysis. Patient demographics, facility information and physiological variables were obtained. Outcome variables included length of stay, no of patients with complications and mortality. Multivariate logistic or linear regression analyses were employed for assessing outcome variations. Results: Of the 12,581,375 trauma admissions, 1,504,848 (12%) met the inclusion criteria with 15 AI and 94 SI exclusive facilities identified. Patient demographics were 66% male, 62 - 63% white and 81% blunt injury. Higher length of stay, mortality, and complications were noted in SI vs. AI centers. Conclusions: Our results indicate ACS verified level I trauma centers have better clinical outcomes than State designated level I trauma centers. This study warrants future prospective studies to determine the impact of level of designation on clinical outcomes.

AB - Background: Two systems exist for evaluating the abilities of trauma centers: the American College of Surgeons' (ACS) verification and the State's designation. Given criteria variations between the two systems, we studied clinical outcome variations of the same. Methods: The National Trauma Databank was queried from 2002 - 2009, 2013 & 2014 for all patients admitted to a State designated (SI) or ACS verified (AI) trauma facility. Centers that were exclusively state or ACS designated were used for analysis. Patient demographics, facility information and physiological variables were obtained. Outcome variables included length of stay, no of patients with complications and mortality. Multivariate logistic or linear regression analyses were employed for assessing outcome variations. Results: Of the 12,581,375 trauma admissions, 1,504,848 (12%) met the inclusion criteria with 15 AI and 94 SI exclusive facilities identified. Patient demographics were 66% male, 62 - 63% white and 81% blunt injury. Higher length of stay, mortality, and complications were noted in SI vs. AI centers. Conclusions: Our results indicate ACS verified level I trauma centers have better clinical outcomes than State designated level I trauma centers. This study warrants future prospective studies to determine the impact of level of designation on clinical outcomes.

KW - Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

KW - Public Health Systems Research

KW - Quality of Health Care

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058220013&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85058220013&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5812/traumamon.14435

DO - 10.5812/traumamon.14435

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85058220013

VL - 23

JO - Trauma Monthly

JF - Trauma Monthly

SN - 2251-7464

IS - 6

M1 - e14435

ER -