Cargando…

Adoption of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme for Injured Patients

BACKGROUND: When emergency medical services (EMS) providers respond to the scene of an injury, they must decide where to transport the injured patients for further evaluation and treatment. This is done through a process known as “field triage”, whereby a patient’s injuries are matched to the most a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sasser, Scott M., Ossmann, Eric, Wald, Marlena M., Lerner, E. Brooke, Hunt, Richard C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3117601/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21731782
_version_ 1782206343347699712
author Sasser, Scott M.
Ossmann, Eric
Wald, Marlena M.
Lerner, E. Brooke
Hunt, Richard C.
author_facet Sasser, Scott M.
Ossmann, Eric
Wald, Marlena M.
Lerner, E. Brooke
Hunt, Richard C.
author_sort Sasser, Scott M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: When emergency medical services (EMS) providers respond to the scene of an injury, they must decide where to transport the injured patients for further evaluation and treatment. This is done through a process known as “field triage”, whereby a patient’s injuries are matched to the most appropriate hospital. In 2005–2006 the National Expert Panel on Field Triage, convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, revised the 1999 American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma Field Triage Decision Scheme. This revision, the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme, was published in 2006. METHODS: State Public Health departments’ and EMS’ external websites were evaluated to ascertain the current status of implementation of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme. RESULTS: Information regarding field triage was located for 41 states. In nine states no information regarding field triage was available on their websites. Of the 41 states where information was located, seven were classified as “full adopters” of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme; nine were considered “partial adopters”; 17 states were found to be using a full version or modification of the 1999 Field Triage Decision Scheme; and eight states were considered to be using a different protocol or scheme for field triage. CONCLUSION: Many states have adopted the 2006 Decision Scheme (full or partial). Further investigation is needed to determine the reasons why some states do not adopt the guidelines.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3117601
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31176012011-07-01 Adoption of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme for Injured Patients Sasser, Scott M. Ossmann, Eric Wald, Marlena M. Lerner, E. Brooke Hunt, Richard C. West J Emerg Med Injury Control and Response BACKGROUND: When emergency medical services (EMS) providers respond to the scene of an injury, they must decide where to transport the injured patients for further evaluation and treatment. This is done through a process known as “field triage”, whereby a patient’s injuries are matched to the most appropriate hospital. In 2005–2006 the National Expert Panel on Field Triage, convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, revised the 1999 American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma Field Triage Decision Scheme. This revision, the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme, was published in 2006. METHODS: State Public Health departments’ and EMS’ external websites were evaluated to ascertain the current status of implementation of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme. RESULTS: Information regarding field triage was located for 41 states. In nine states no information regarding field triage was available on their websites. Of the 41 states where information was located, seven were classified as “full adopters” of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme; nine were considered “partial adopters”; 17 states were found to be using a full version or modification of the 1999 Field Triage Decision Scheme; and eight states were considered to be using a different protocol or scheme for field triage. CONCLUSION: Many states have adopted the 2006 Decision Scheme (full or partial). Further investigation is needed to determine the reasons why some states do not adopt the guidelines. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine 2011-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3117601/ /pubmed/21731782 Text en Copyright © 2011 the authors. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Injury Control and Response
Sasser, Scott M.
Ossmann, Eric
Wald, Marlena M.
Lerner, E. Brooke
Hunt, Richard C.
Adoption of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme for Injured Patients
title Adoption of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme for Injured Patients
title_full Adoption of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme for Injured Patients
title_fullStr Adoption of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme for Injured Patients
title_full_unstemmed Adoption of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme for Injured Patients
title_short Adoption of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme for Injured Patients
title_sort adoption of the 2006 field triage decision scheme for injured patients
topic Injury Control and Response
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3117601/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21731782
work_keys_str_mv AT sasserscottm adoptionofthe2006fieldtriagedecisionschemeforinjuredpatients
AT ossmanneric adoptionofthe2006fieldtriagedecisionschemeforinjuredpatients
AT waldmarlenam adoptionofthe2006fieldtriagedecisionschemeforinjuredpatients
AT lernerebrooke adoptionofthe2006fieldtriagedecisionschemeforinjuredpatients
AT huntrichardc adoptionofthe2006fieldtriagedecisionschemeforinjuredpatients