Standardizing data collection in severe trauma call for linking up 英文参考文献.docVIP

Engel Critical Care 2012,16:105 /content/16/1/105 COMMENTARY Standardizing data collection in severe trauma: call for linking up Doortje C Engel* See related research by Ringdal et al., /content/15/5/R237 working group on systematic documentation of trauma Abstract care and performance in 2008 [4] using derivatives of the Standardization of data collection in severely injured trauma patients in order to ?nd the best performance and practice has been an issue for more than 20 years. The incidence of trauma has decreased and outcomes have improved over the past decades. Trauma still remains an important public health problem, however, and is listed by the World Health Organization as a leading cause of death and disability. Ringdal and colleagues prove the feasibility on a basic level in their prospective, intercontinental study showing the results of the Utstein Trauma Template. In-depth analysis is currently only partially possible. The future of standardizing data collection in trauma looks bright. However, bridging and cross-linking is necessary to a great extent in the future. Utstein style recommendations [5] and the Scandinavian (SCANTEM), British (TARN), German (DGU-TR) and Italian (RITG) trauma registries. e overall aim of the commented article was to investigate the feasibility of this template to allow valid epidemiological trauma studies, to make it possible to identify important factors that are related to outcome in existing systems, and to identify systems or part of systems with high or low performance. Complete data for 28 of 36 variables in 80% of 962 patients from 42 centers in three continents (Europe, Australia and North America) are probably the best score ever in a prospective study of th e need for trauma registries was noticed in 1989 [6]. Ten years later the e? ectiveness of systematic reviews of trauma registries in order to improve pe