Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAhmed, HEen_US
dc.contributor.authorBaldock, Ten_US
dc.contributor.authorWei, Nen_US
dc.contributor.authorWalshaw, Ten_US
dc.contributor.authorWalker, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorTrompeter, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorScott, Sen_US
dc.contributor.authorEardley, WGPen_US
dc.contributor.authorORTHOPOD Collaboratorsen_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-12-13T16:35:47Z
dc.date.available2023-08-20en_US
dc.date.issued2023-12en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/92920
dc.description.abstractINTRODUCTION: Current practice following injury within the United Kingdom is to receive surgery, at the institution of first contact regardless of ability to provide timely intervention and inconsiderate of neighbouring hospital resource and capacity. This can lead to a mismatch of demand and capacity, delayed surgery and stress within hospital systems, particularly with regards to elective services. We demonstrate through a multicentre, multinational study, the impact of this at scale. METHODOLOGY: ORTHOPOD data collection period was between 22/08/2022 and 16/10/2022 and consisted of two arms. Arm 1 captured orthopaedic trauma caseload and capacity in terms of sessions available per centre and patients awaiting surgery per centre per given week. Arm 2 recorded patient and injury demographics, time of decision making, outpatient and inpatient timeframes as well as time to surgery. Hand and spine cases were excluded. For this regional comparison, regional trauma networks with a minimum of four centres enroled onto the ORTHOPOD study were exclusively analysed. RESULTS: Following analysis of 11,202 patient episodes across 30 hospitals we found no movement of any patient between hospitals to enable prompt surgery. There is no current system to move patients, between regional centres despite clear discrepancies in workload per capacity across the United Kingdom. Many patients wait for days for surgery when simple transfer to a neighbouring hospital (within 10 miles in many instances) would result in prompt care within national guidelines. CONCLUSION: Most trauma patients in the United Kingdom are managed exclusively at the place of first presentation, with no consideration of alternative pathways to local hospitals that may, at that time, offer increased operative capacity and a shorter waiting time. There is no oversight of trauma workload per capacity at neighbouring hospitals within a regional trauma network. This leads to a marked disparity in waiting time to surgery, and subsequently it can be inferred but not proven, poorer patient experience and outcomes. This inevitably leads to a strain on the overall trauma system and across several centres can impact on elective surgery recovery. We propose the consideration of inter-regional network collaboration, aligned with the Major Trauma System.en_US
dc.format.extent111007 - ?en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofInjuryen_US
dc.rightsAttribution 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectAmbulatoryen_US
dc.subjectCancellationsen_US
dc.subjectDay-case traumaen_US
dc.subjectDelaysen_US
dc.subjectFractureen_US
dc.subjectTime to surgeryen_US
dc.subjectTraumaen_US
dc.subjectHumansen_US
dc.subjectInpatientsen_US
dc.subjectOrthopedicsen_US
dc.subjectUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.subjectHospitalsen_US
dc.titleLack of regional pathways impact on surgical delay: Analysis of the Orthopaedic Trauma Hospital Outcomes-Patient Operative Delays (ORTHOPOD) study.en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.injury.2023.111007en_US
pubs.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37976922en_US
pubs.issue12en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden_US
pubs.volume54en_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2023-08-20en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution 3.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution 3.0 United States