Air medical journal · 2022
A Comparison of Tube Thoracostomy for Chest Trauma Between Prehospital and Inhospital Settings.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Kushida Yoshihiro, Takeuchi Ikuto, Muramatsu Ken-Ichi, Nagasawa Hiroki, Jitsuiki Kei, Ohsaka Hiromichi, Ishikawa Kouhei, Yanagawa Youichi
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: We compared the outcomes of patients with tube thoracostomy for chest trauma between the prehospital and inhospital settings.
METHODS: The subjects were then divided into 2 groups: the prehospital group, which included subjects who underwent tube thoracostomy in the prehospital setting, and the inhospital group, which included subjects who underwent tube thoracostomy in the inhospital setting. The variables were compared between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with regard to gender, age, history, mechanism of injury, infusion of antibiotics, white blood cell count, duration of insertion of a chest drain, mechanical ventilation, complication of drain infection, duration of admission, or final outcome. However, the Injury Severity Score, maximum C-reactive protein level, and maximum temperature during hospitalization in the prehospital group (n = 15) were significantly greater than those in the inhospital group (n = 119).
CONCLUSION: The present study suggested that thoracostomy performed by physicians in the prehospital setting was safe and did not have an increased risk of infection. In addition, thoracostomy for chest injury in the prehospital setting suggested an improvement in the likelihood of a survival outcome.
METHODS: The subjects were then divided into 2 groups: the prehospital group, which included subjects who underwent tube thoracostomy in the prehospital setting, and the inhospital group, which included subjects who underwent tube thoracostomy in the inhospital setting. The variables were compared between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with regard to gender, age, history, mechanism of injury, infusion of antibiotics, white blood cell count, duration of insertion of a chest drain, mechanical ventilation, complication of drain infection, duration of admission, or final outcome. However, the Injury Severity Score, maximum C-reactive protein level, and maximum temperature during hospitalization in the prehospital group (n = 15) were significantly greater than those in the inhospital group (n = 119).
CONCLUSION: The present study suggested that thoracostomy performed by physicians in the prehospital setting was safe and did not have an increased risk of infection. In addition, thoracostomy for chest injury in the prehospital setting suggested an improvement in the likelihood of a survival outcome.