Comparison of military and civilian surgeon outcomes with emergent trauma laparotomy in a mature military-civilian partnership.

Autor:	Lammers D; Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA., Uhlich R; Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA., Rokayak O; Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA., Manley N; Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA., Betzold RD; Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA., Hu P; Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Trauma surgery & acute care open [Trauma Surg Acute Care Open] 2024 Mar 01; Vol. 9 (1), pp. e001332. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Mar 01 (Print Publication: 2024).
DOI:	10.1136/tsaco-2023-001332
Abstrakt:	Introduction: Medical readiness is of paramount concern for active-duty military providers. Low volumes of complex trauma in military treatment facilities has driven the armed forces to embed surgeons in high-volume civilian centers to maintain clinical readiness. It is unclear what impact this strategy may have on patient outcomes in these centers. We sought to compare emergent trauma laparotomy (ETL) outcomes between active-duty Air Force Special Operations Surgical Team (SOST) general surgeons and civilian faculty at an American College of Surgeons verified level 1 trauma center with a well-established military-civilian partnership. Methods: Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained, single-center database of ETL from 2019 to 2022 was performed. ETL was defined as laparotomy from trauma bay within 90 min of patient arrival. The primary outcome was to assess for all-cause mortality differences at multiple time points. Results: 514 ETL were performed during the study period. 22% (113 of 514) of patients were hypotensive (systolic blood pressure ≤90 mm Hg) on arrival. Six SOST surgeons performed 43 ETL compared with 471 ETL by civilian faculty. There were no differences in median ED length of stay (27 min vs 22 min; p=0.21), but operative duration was significantly longer for SOST surgeons (129 min vs 110 min; p=0.01). There were no differences in intraoperative (5% vs 2%; p=0.30), 6-hour (3% vs 5%; p=0.64), 24-hour (5% vs 5%; p=1.0), or in-hospital mortality rates (5% vs 8%; p=0.56) between SOST and civilian surgeons. SOST surgeons did not significantly impact the odds of 24-hour mortality on multivariable analysis (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.10, 6.09). Conclusion: Trauma-related mortality for patients undergoing ETL was not impacted by SOST surgeons when compared with their civilian counterparts. Military surgeons may benefit from the valuable clinical experience and mentorship of experienced civilian trauma surgeons at high volume trauma centers without creating a deficit in the quality of care provided. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic/care management. Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared. (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu