European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025
The differences in injury patterns and outcomes of thoracic trauma between rural and urban level two trauma centers in a single country.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Goldstein Adam Lee, Machlouf Yarden, Moshe Daniella, Laks Shachar, Abu Akar Firas, Bar-Haim Ronit, Levit Barak, Awad Alaa, Rom Adva, Wiesel Ory
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Equal level trauma centers in the same country might have significant differences regarding their demographics and types of trauma. Understanding geographic variations in injury patterns are essential for optimal care. Here we describe the differences in injury patterns and associated outcomes of thoracic trauma patients between rural and urban level-II trauma centers in a single country.
METHOD: A retrospective analysis of patients with thoracic trauma over a three-year period in a rural level-II and an urban level-II in Israel were compared. Demographics, mechanism of injury, prehospital care, transport, hospitalization course, discharge disposition, and outcomes were all analyzed.
RESULTS: There were significant differences between the demography, mechanisms of injury, and sustained injuries. The urban population was older, with more pedestrians hit by motor vehicles, falls from standing or sitting, and penetrating injuries. The rural population suffered from more motor vehicle crashes and falls from heights, with injuries related to higher velocity mechanisms such as lung contusions, sternal fractures, and liver injuries. There was no significant difference in transportation time or injury severity scores. More advanced life support ambulances were utilized in the rural setting together with more transfers to a higher level of care, while more patients in the urban center were lost to follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Understanding the differences between geographic locations is crucial towards optimizing trauma care. The complexities of thoracic trauma patients are an important example of the variations between rural and urban trauma centers. Respecting these differences will help to improve preparedness and treatment for trauma patients.
METHOD: A retrospective analysis of patients with thoracic trauma over a three-year period in a rural level-II and an urban level-II in Israel were compared. Demographics, mechanism of injury, prehospital care, transport, hospitalization course, discharge disposition, and outcomes were all analyzed.
RESULTS: There were significant differences between the demography, mechanisms of injury, and sustained injuries. The urban population was older, with more pedestrians hit by motor vehicles, falls from standing or sitting, and penetrating injuries. The rural population suffered from more motor vehicle crashes and falls from heights, with injuries related to higher velocity mechanisms such as lung contusions, sternal fractures, and liver injuries. There was no significant difference in transportation time or injury severity scores. More advanced life support ambulances were utilized in the rural setting together with more transfers to a higher level of care, while more patients in the urban center were lost to follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Understanding the differences between geographic locations is crucial towards optimizing trauma care. The complexities of thoracic trauma patients are an important example of the variations between rural and urban trauma centers. Respecting these differences will help to improve preparedness and treatment for trauma patients.