logo BDSP

Base documentaire


Votre avis nous intéresse

Le réseau BDSP met en oeuvre un projet d'innovation et d'amélioration de ses services, dans le souci constant de proposer des contenus de qualité adaptés aux besoins des utilisateurs.

Identifier de nouvelles sources de financements est la condition nécessaire pour assurer la poursuite et la pérennité de cet outil unique qu'est la BDSP, tout en le faisant évoluer.

Pour définir un nouveau modèle économique, nous avons besoin de votre avis : merci de répondre à notre enquête (temps estimé : 5 minutes).

Participer maintenant
Participer plus tard J'ai déjà participé

  1. Benchmarking the quality-monitoring process : A comparison of outcomes analysis by Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) methodology with the peer-review process. Commentary.

    Article, Communication - En anglais

    Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma. Houston, Texas (USA), 1996/09/19.

    Background 

    One measure of optimal function within a trauma center is the ability to critically examine outcomes from the process of care within the institution, yet guidelines for evaluation of the peer-review process are lacking.

    This study was conducted to determine the correlation between mortality analysis performed by the peer-review process (PR) within a trauma division and outcome analysis as determined by Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) methodology.

    Methods 

    The mortality peer-review data for an entire year at our level I trauma center served as the study population.

    Information was obtained on probability of survival, and a determination of preventability was made using standard, preexisting criteria.

    Peer review involves assigning each outcome to a specific category through the process of multidisciplinary assessment.

    Probability of survival data was not used for this purpose.

    Kappa analysis was performed to determine the degree of agreement in each category and then tested for significance.

    Results 

    One hundred four deaths in 1,868 trauma patients (5.5%) were reviewed at our multidisciplinary conference.

    Outcomes were judged as preventable, potentially preventable, or nonpreventable.

    Death directly related to exsanguination was typically categorized as potentially preventable.

    Kappa analysis demonstrated the greatest agreement between PR and TRISS in the nonpreventable category (kappa=0. (...)

    Mots-clés Pascal : Polytraumatisme, Echelle évaluation, Relation, Indice gravité, Evolution, Mortalité, Evaluation performance, Homme, Traumatisme

    Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Multiple injury, Evaluation scale, Relation, Severity score, Evolution, Mortality, Performance evaluation, Human, Trauma

    Logo du centre Notice produite par :
    Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique

    Cote : 97-0351732

    Code Inist : 002B16N. Création : 12/09/1997.