Effects of the establishment of a trauma center and a new protocol on patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures at a single institution in Korea

Purpose The aim of this study was to determine whether the outcomes of patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic bone fractures changed after the introduction of a protocol including extraperitoneal pelvic packing (EPP) and the establishment of a trauma center. Methods We analyzed data of adult...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007) 2019-04, Vol.45 (2), p.273-279
Main Authors: Lee, Min A., Yu, Byungchul, Lee, Jungnam, Park, Jae Jeong, Lee, Gil Jae, Choi, Kang Kook, Park, Youngeun, Gwak, Jihun, Han, Ahram
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Critical Care Medicine
Emergency Medicine
Fractures
Hemodynamics
Hemorrhagic shock
Intensive
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Mortality
Original Article
Sports Medicine
Surgery
Surgical Orthopedics
Trauma centers
Traumatic Surgery
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose The aim of this study was to determine whether the outcomes of patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic bone fractures changed after the introduction of a protocol including extraperitoneal pelvic packing (EPP) and the establishment of a trauma center. Methods We analyzed data of adult patients (≥ 18 years old) with hemodynamically unstable pelvic bone fractures who visited a single trauma center from February 2009 to October 2016. In July 2014, a new protocol for pelvic fractures was implemented, and a trauma center was established. Therefore, patient outcomes were compared by period (period I: pre-protocol vs. period II: post-protocol). Results Seventy-nine patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic bone fractures were recruited. The time to angiographic embolization after arrival at the emergency room decreased significantly in period II when compared to period I (182.9 vs. 268.9 min, respectively, p  
ISSN:1863-9933
1863-9941
DOI:10.1007/s00068-017-0899-y