Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Users Online: 424

 

Home  | About Us | Editors | Search | Ahead Of Print | Current Issue | Archives | Submit Article | Instructions | Subscribe | Contacts | Login 
     


 
 
Table of Contents
SYMPOSIUM ON PEDIATRIC TRAUMA
Year : 2012  |  Volume : 2  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 149-155

Quality care in pediatric trauma


1 Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
2 Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA

Date of Web Publication12-Sep-2012

Correspondence Address:
Tam N Pham
University of Washington, Harborview Medical Center, 325 Ninth Ave, Box 359796, Seattle, WA 98104
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2229-5151.100893

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 

Infrastructure, processes of care and outcome measurements are the cornerstone of quality care for pediatric trauma. This review aims to evaluate current evidence on system organization and concentration of pediatric expertise in the delivery of pediatric trauma care. It discusses key quality indicators for all phases of care, from pre-hospital to post-discharge recovery. In particular, it highlights the importance of measuring quality of life and psychosocial recovery for the injured child.

Keywords: Outcomes, process, quality improvement, registry


How to cite this article:
Simpson AJ, Rivara FP, Pham TN. Quality care in pediatric trauma. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci 2012;2:149-55

How to cite this URL:
Simpson AJ, Rivara FP, Pham TN. Quality care in pediatric trauma. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci [serial online] 2012 [cited 2019 May 25];2:149-55. Available from: http://www.ijciis.org/text.asp?2012/2/3/149/100893


   Introduction Top


Injury is the number one cause of death in children ages 1-14 in the US, with head injury (38%) as the leading cause of all pediatric injuries. [1],[2] While the creation of integrated and regionalized trauma systems has increased access and improved survival for all trauma victims, research on specifically improving pediatric trauma outcomes has emerged as an important focus in recent years. Infrastructure, processes of care, and outcome measurements are the cornerstone of quality care.

Survival is frequently cited as the primary outcome of interest after trauma, yet this may no longer be a sufficient indicator of quality care since mortality is relatively low in injured children (about 4% in the recent literature).? [3] Current research indicates that care processes and posthospital indicators, including health-related quality of Life (HRQOL), long-term effects on family and care-takers, and rates of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and psychosocial recovery are perhaps better measures of the overall quality of care for the injured child. This review aims to familiarize health providers with key concepts that define quality in pediatric trauma care.


   Trauma System Organization Top


Regionalization and pediatric expertise

The impetus for regionalization grew from concern that not all acute facilities were equally prepared to care for the injured child. In fact, half of all U.S. emergency departments see fewer than 10 pediatric patients per day. [4] This contrasts with regional centers, which are staffed by surgeons and intensivists with specialized pediatric training. Surgeons experienced in pediatric trauma have championed the development of non-operative management of solid organ injuries for over 20 years. [5],[6],[7] Successful nonoperative management avoids the surgical costs and complications associated with unnecessary laparotomies. Nonoperative management of solid organ injuries is the current accepted standard of care in hemodynamically stable children. Yet, nonpediatric hospitals have been slow to adopt this practice. Bowman and colleagues report that US children with splenic injuries treated in general hospitals have five times the odds ratio of splenectomy compared to those treated at children's hospitals. [8] A recent study by Hamlat found that there are still large variations in splenectomy rates across the country, unexplained by severity of injury. [9] The rate of successful splenic salvage is arguably a quality indicator in pediatric trauma.

The organization of critical care services is another determinant of quality care. Developing and maintaining a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) is a necessary first step. [10],[11],[12] The PICU assembles the expertise of pediatric-trained providers, nurses, and the proper equipment to care for critically ill children. While there is general consensus that PICUs are desirable, some debate exists over the best physician staffing model for pediatric trauma. In the open-ICU model, pediatric and trauma surgeons are responsible throughout the continuum of care, including the emergency department, operating room, and ICU. This model is appealing in that both the trauma expertise and the knowledge about the individual patient are concentrated in the same team. The disadvantage is that surgeons are not always immediately available to the PICU because these individuals have operative and other responsibilities in addition to ICU care. In contrast, the closed-ICU model consists of a dedicated staff intensivist who is solely responsible for the injured child in the PICU. This physician may be a surgeon-intensivist, or more frequently a pediatric intensivist. To be effective, this model requires close communication between intensivists and surgeons because care of the injured child clearly requires both areas of expertise. [13] Current research indicates that the closed-ICU model is superior in adult critical care, but this concept awaits validation in pediatric trauma. [14],[15]

Whereas organized trauma systems clearly reduce deaths in adults, similar evidence to support regional pediatric trauma care remains limited. [16],[17] Seminal work by Pollack and others provided the initial evidence that critically ill and injured children treated in tertiary care facilities had a reduced risk of death compared to nontertiary care centers. [10],[11] Based on this and other early studies, task forces organized by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) advocated for regionalization of pediatric trauma care. During the last two decades, pediatric-specific trauma centers have been developed as resources for the comprehensive care of injured children. A nationwide retrospective analysis of the US Kids' Inpatient Database indicated that severely injured children (Injury Severity Score>15) treated at children's hospitals had improved survival compared to those treated in adult hospitals. [18] However, this study used only administrative data, did not account for trauma system designation, and was not able to fully control for confounding by injury severity and other risk factors. Statewide analyses suggest that both trauma designation and pediatric expertise are important components to reduce trauma deaths. [19], [20,][21] To date, there has been no large-scale prospective study comparing outcomes of pediatric trauma centers to non-trauma centers as has been done with adult trauma care.

Despite this regionalization effort, most injured children in the US are not treated at specialized pediatric centers. [18],[22] Segui-Gomez and colleagues reported that 77% of injured children receive care at centers without pediatric designation. [23] This disparity in access also highlights the limitations of the existing observational literature comparing outcomes, as it is difficult to account for the likelihood of referral to a specialized pediatric trauma center. Even in organized trauma systems, factors such as mode of transport and prehospital patient condition heavily influence where an injured child will receive their hospital care. For instance, children with apparent minor injuries may be transported by their parents than by EMS. Parents often transport based on geography rather than level of care. [24] Recent data indicate that many children have inappropriate delays to definitive care in current trauma systems. [25]

Only through improved coordination among acute care facilities will the injured child be able to receive definitive care at the facility with the most appropriate resources. This is the goal of inclusive trauma systems. In contrast to exclusive trauma systems, in which only a handful of centers develop the expertise to care for trauma patients, inclusive trauma systems seek the participation of virtually all facilities to develop a tiered-triage system. Each participating facility within the regional network receives a designation-level (usually 1 through 4) based on their capability. In adult trauma, inclusive trauma systems provide greater inpatient survival of severely injured patients. This is thought to be due to early referral of severely injured patients within an integrated regional network system. [26] Inclusive systems also have lower splenectomy rates after spleen trauma and lower nephrectomy rates after renal trauma, likely because of transfer to tertiary centers where non-operative management of solid organ injuries is more common. [26],[27] Although specific data about inclusive pediatric trauma systems are currently lacking, we believe that their development can be rationalized based on the available adult data. Proper evaluation of inclusive systems in pediatric trauma care will be possible during the development phase.


   Quality Indicators By Phase Of Care Top


Prehospital care

Advances in pediatric transport medicine have also taken place over the last two to three decades, paralleling regionalization efforts. The identification of severely ill children and early stabilization permit rapid pre-hospital transport in the "golden hour" to specialized centers capable of definitive interventions. The "golden hour" concept originated from an early 1970s study by Cowley et al. who demonstrated improved outcomes with rapid delivery of patients to trauma centers. [28] This is the foundation of transport teams, which focuses primarily on scene-related triage. As mentioned above, however, much of scene-related transport for minor trauma is done by parents and the majority of EMS pediatric transport is interfacility. [24] Recent studies allude to a misapplication of the "golden hour" concept in pediatric trauma. [29],[30] This occurs because of the focus on transport to tertiary trauma centers from outlying hospitals as quickly as possible. This can delay early critical therapies, which can be initiated in local emergency departments. The IMPACT prospective randomized trial indicated that patients who had enhanced monitoring during transport subsequently had shorter lengths of stay and lower rates of multi organ dysfunction. [31] Future research and system implementation should focus on critical early goal-directed therapies initiated at the referring hospital and continued in transport to the pediatric trauma center.

In-hospital care

Changes in the care of the injured child can be challenging to implement system-wide when data are limited. Both the proper documentation in a registry and its timely and thorough review are required processes for quality improvement. Important quality issues can be tracked, and set up as audit filters for discussion among the leadership within a trauma network. The issue of quality control of trauma care arose in the mid 1960s in a US National Research Council report. [32] Cook County Hospital in Chicago started the first computerized trauma database in 1969, which eventually grew into the Illinois statewide registry in 1971. [33] Large-scale registries have subsequently been created around the world, which has allowed for a more objective comparison of treatment techniques with national or international standards. Registry data also allows for monitoring of performance over time and identification of institutional outliers for internal review. [34] The initial use of registries was primarily in the adult trauma literature; however, its use has also been applied to the pediatric population. In the pediatric setting large shifts in management of trauma have occurred from evaluation of trauma registry data. In 2006, the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS-COT) created the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) to develop national reporting and quality improvement for trauma patients. [35],[36],[37] Glance and colleagues recently used a statewide trauma registry to evaluate ACS-COT quality indicators and patient outcomes. The ACS-COT audit filters have been found to be predictive of increased mortality (6 specific audits were identified) but less predictive of which specific processes of care affect other clinical outcomes. [38] The identification of quality metrics, which can identify specific in-hospital care processes associated with changes in clinical outcomes, is needed. [Table 1] summarizes currently proposed quality metrics in pediatric trauma care. Posthospital outcome measures, however, may be more appropriate to evaluate quality of care than audit filters of care processes.
Table 1: Quality metrics

Click here to view


Posthospital care: Outcomes measures

Long-term rehabilitation and reintegration


After discharge from acute care hospital treatment, recovery and reintegration into society can be challenging. For instance, motor, cognitive and behavioral functions can be impaired for years after brain injury. [44] Inpatient rehabilitation is indicted for all children with severe TBI and many of those with moderate TBI as well as other injuries such as severe burns and extensive orthopedic trauma. Rivara and colleagues have recently developed quality of care indicators for the structure/organization and for the process of inpatient rehabilitation care. [45],[46] Analysis of data from nine centers indicates large variation both within and across hospitals in the quality of inpatient rehabilitation care delivered for children with TBI. [47]

The recent literature has focused on long-term outcomes as indicators of recovery, rehabilitation and reintegration. [Table 2] summarizes important outcome measures for pediatric TBI, burns, rehabilitation, orthopedics and injury prevention. Key measures are reviewed below.
Table 2: Published outcome measures in select pediatric trauma disciplines

Click here to view


Health-related quality of life

Indicators of quality care in pediatric trauma has been somewhat limited by the number of outcomes measured. Clinical markers, rates of recidivism and mortality are inadequate to properly assess the burden of injury and effectiveness of treatment. [61] HRQOL has been proposed as a complementary outcome measure. As a patient (or proxy) reported outcome, HRQOL reflects the patient's measure of physical, mental and social well-being. HRQOL therefore offers an important perspective on the success of health services and treatments rendered. [52],[62] A number of studies have evaluated HRQOL as a means to measure improvements in care of the pediatric trauma patient. Several screening and assessment tools have been used including the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL), PEDI, TACQOL, QWB, CHO, WeeFIM and the NIH PROMIS measures. [63],[64] (www.nihpromis.org) These measurement tools have been widely validated in the chronic disease setting. [65] These tools have both a patient and parent version. In general self-reported QOL from injured children rather than their parents is preferred as parents may be influenced their own psychopathology and experiences during the recovery phase. [64] [Table 3] summarizes the domains and items queried in current HRQOL tools. None was specifically designed for trauma, and their use in pediatric trauma has been limited until recently. No current consensus exists on which screening assessment to use. Other challenges include the heterogeneity of the patient population, variations in follow-up lengths. Current research efforts aim to provide long-term follow-up data in specific diseases such as TBI. [73] More recent research has modified existing screening tools to tailor to the specific disease burden of trauma patients, primarily long-term cognitive defects and family burden. More recent research has modified existing screening tools to tailor to the specific disease burden of trauma patients, primarily long-term cognitive defects and family burden. Most studies show an initial plateau in recovery after the 6 month postdischarge rapid initial recovery (discharge 24-36 months out). [77] Long-term follow-up studies are needed, as are tools to identify which patients are at greatest risk for long-term deficits.
Table 3: Health-related quality of life screening tools

Click here to view


Family/care-taker burden

There is a significant long-term impact on caregivers and families from pediatric trauma. This is particularly true in the traumatic brain injury population. Family burden is higher when a child's functioning is poorer and healthcare needs are unmet. It is manifested by a high degree of family stress and disorganization, mental health problems, and unmet needs for health care. This is even more evident in families of lower socioeconomic status with less access to care and higher rates of being uninsured. [78] Severe TBI is a source of considerable family morbidity when compared to other traumatic injuries. Rates of family dysfunction and stress are perceptibly higher 3 years after injury. [50] HRQOL assessment tools can be used to identify caregivers with significant distress. Family functioning before and after the injury has a significant effect on HRQOL outcomes in children after trauma. [79] Parental behaviors after the traumatic event are perhaps more important for the child's adjustment and recovery than the actual event exposure itself. Identification of these at-risk families is crucial to provide support and ultimately mitigate these stressors. [80]

Pediatric post-traumatic stress disorder/psychosocial recovery

Newer literature has begun to recognize the significant role of pediatric post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in HRQOL after pediatric trauma. The following features distinguish PTSD if symptoms persist longer than 1 month: 1) re-experiencing the traumatic event, 2) avoidance of stimuli associated with the trauma or emotional numbing, and 3) hyper-arousal. [81] Some even suggest that injuries result in higher rates of PTSD than other serious pediatric medical conditions including diabetes and cancer. [82] A recent meta-analysis identified a number of risk factors that contribute to development of PTSD after trauma. The most important risk factors included female sex, pretrauma psychopathology, perception of threat to life and post-trauma parental distress. [83] This meta-analysis primarily included children injured from motor vehicle collisions. Thus it is unknown whether these risk factors can be extrapolated to other injury mechanisms. [84] Although it may seem intuitive that more severe injuries predispose children to PTSD, a number of divergent reports have been published on this issue. [85],[86],[87] As such, a clear link between injury severity (ISS) and rates of PTSD has been difficult to establish, yet it appears that certain injury mechanisms such as gunshot wounds are associated with higher PTSD development. [88] Age at the time of injury may also play a significant factor. Holbrook showed that adolescents in major trauma have significant long-term deficits in quality of life. [89] We expect that future investigations will help clarify the associations between age, injury mechanism, and rate of psychosocial recovery.

Despite the growing body of research highlighting the significance of PTSD in pediatric trauma, most injured children do not currently receive the acute and long term psychological care that they need postinjury. Currently, very few (20%) trauma centers have PTSD-specific screening and intervention services available. [59] One screening tool developed to identify youth at-risk is the Screening Tool for Early Predictors of PTSD (STEPP). Winston and colleagues have indicated that STEPP has high specificity to identify children at high risk of developing PTSD by using risk factors reported in the literature. [90] The existing literature suggests that interventions that address cognitive behaviors and family stress burden may help promote psychological recovery.


   Conclusions Top


Quality care improvement in pediatric trauma can be achieved via a system-based approach that addresses infrastructure, care processes, and outcomes measurements. Beyond the traditional mortality benchmark, pediatric trauma is associated with measurable long-term effects on disability and reintegration, quality of life, and family stress. To address these issues, trauma providers need to revamp the way we conceptualize care and integrate long-term follow-up into the acute care model. Long-term outcomes should also be tracked by national registries to enable us to determine which changes in care may improve postdischarge outcomes.

 
   References Top

1.Krug EG, Sharma GK, Lozano R. The global burden of injuries. Am J Public Health 2000;90:523-6.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]    
2.Nance ML RM, Fildes JJ. National Trauma Databank Pediatric Annual Report. 2011.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Abdullah F, Gabre-Kidan A, Zhang Y, Sharpe L, Chang DC. Report of 2,087,915 surgical admissions in U.S. children: Inpatient mortality rates by procedure and specialty. World J Surg 2009;33:2714-21.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.Gausche-Hill M, Schmitz C, Lewis RJ. Pediatric preparedness of US emergency departments: A 2003 survey. Pediatrics 2007;120:1229-37.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]    
5.Amroch D, Schiavon G, Carmignola G, Zoppellaro F, Marzaro M, Berton F, et al. Isolated blunt liver trauma: Is nonoperative treatment justified? J Pediatr Surg 1992;27:466-8.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]    
6.Lally KP, Rosario V, Mahour GH, Woolley MM. Evolution in the management of splenic injury in children. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1990;170:245-8.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]    
7.Mandour WA, Lai MK, Linke CA, Frank IN. Blunt renal trauma in the pediatric patient. J Pediatr Surg 1981;16:669-76.  Back to cited text no. 7
[PUBMED]    
8.Bowman SM, Zimmerman FJ, Christakis DA, Sharar SR, Martin DP. Hospital characteristics associated with the management of pediatric splenic injuries. JAMA 2005;294:2611-7.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]    
9.Hamlat CA, Arbabi S, Koepsell TD, Maier RV, Jurkovich GJ, Rivara FP. National variation in outcomes and costs for splenic injury and the impact of trauma systems: A population-based cohort study. Ann Surg 2012;255:165-70.  Back to cited text no. 9
[PUBMED]    
10.Pollack MM, Katz RW, Ruttimann UE, Getson PR. Improving the outcome and efficiency of intensive care: The impact of an intensivist. Crit Care Med 1988;16:11-7.  Back to cited text no. 10
[PUBMED]    
11.Pollack MM, Alexander SR, Clarke N, Ruttimann UE, Tesselaar HM, Bachulis AC. Improved outcomes from tertiary center pediatric intensive care: A statewide comparison of tertiary and nontertiary care facilities. Crit Care Med 1991;19:150-9.  Back to cited text no. 11
[PUBMED]    
12.Randolph AG, Pronovost P. Reorganizing the delivery of intensive care could improve efficiency and save lives. J Eval Clin Pract 2002;8:1-8.  Back to cited text no. 12
[PUBMED]    
13.Dean JM. Role of the pediatric intensivist in the management of pediatric trauma. J Trauma 2007;63(6 Suppl):S101-5; discussion S106-12.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.Nathens AB, Rivara FP, MacKenzie EJ, Maier RV, Wang J, Egleston B, et al. The impact of an intensivist-model ICU on trauma-related mortality. Ann Surg 2006;244:545-54.  Back to cited text no. 14
[PUBMED]    
15.Pronovost PJ, Angus DC, Dorman T, Robinson KA, Dremsizov TT, Young TL. Physician staffing patterns and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: A systematic review. JAMA 2002;288:2151-62.  Back to cited text no. 15
[PUBMED]    
16.Lorch SA, Myers S, Carr B. The regionalization of pediatric health care. Pediatrics;126:1182-90.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.MacKenzie EJ, Rivara FP, Jurkovich GJ, Nathens AB, Frey KP, Egleston BL, et al. A national evaluation of the effect of trauma-center care on mortality. N Engl J Med 2006;354:366-78.  Back to cited text no. 17
[PUBMED]    
18.Densmore JC, Lim HJ, Oldham KT, Guice KS. Outcomes and delivery of care in pediatric injury. J Pediatr Surg 2006;41:92-8; discussion 92-8.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.Amini R, Lavoie A, Moore L, Sirois MJ, Emond M. Pediatric trauma mortality by type of designated hospital in a mature inclusive trauma system. J Emerg Trauma Shock 2011;4:12-9.  Back to cited text no. 19
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
20.Hulka F, Mullins RJ, Mann NC, Hedges JR, Rowland D, Worrall WH, et al. Influence of a statewide trauma system on pediatric hospitalization and outcome. J Trauma 1997;42:514-9.  Back to cited text no. 20
[PUBMED]    
21.Pracht EE, Langland-Orban B, Tepas JJ, 3 rd , Celso BG, Flint L. Analysis of trends in the Florida Trauma System (1991-2003): Changes in mortality after establishment of new centers. Surgery 2006;140:34-43.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.Petrosyan M, Guner YS, Emami CN, Ford HR. Disparities in the delivery of pediatric trauma care. J Trauma 2009;67(2 Suppl):S114-9.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.Segui-Gomez M, Chang DC, Paidas CN, Jurkovich GJ, Mackenzie EJ, Rivara FP. Pediatric trauma care: An overview of pediatric trauma systems and their practices in 18 US states. J Pediatr Surg 2003;38:1162-9.  Back to cited text no. 23
[PUBMED]    
24.Carr BG, Matthew Edwards J, Martinez R. Regionalized care for time-critical conditions: Lessons learned from existing networks. Acad Emerg Med 2010;17:1354-8.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.Acosta CD, Kit Delgado M, Gisondi MA, Raghunathan A, D'Souza PA, Gilbert G, et al. Characteristics of pediatric trauma transfers to a level i trauma center: Implications for developing a regionalized pediatric trauma system in california. Acad Emerg Med 2010;17:1364-73.  Back to cited text no. 25
[PUBMED]    
26.Utter GH, Maier RV, Rivara FP, Mock CN, Jurkovich GJ, Nathens AB. Inclusive trauma systems: Do they improve triage or outcomes of the severely injured? J Trauma 2006;60:529-35; discussion 535-7.  Back to cited text no. 26
[PUBMED]    
27.Vanni AJ, Hotaling J, Hamlat C, Jurkovich GJ, Voelzke BB. Do inclusive trauma systems improve outcomes after renal trauma? J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2012;72:385-9.  Back to cited text no. 27
[PUBMED]    
28.Cowley RA, Hudson F, Scanlan E, Gill W, Lally RJ, Long W, et al. An economical and proved helicopter program for transporting the emergency critically ill and injured patient in Maryland. J Trauma 1973;13:1029-38.  Back to cited text no. 28
[PUBMED]    
29.Lerner EB, Moscati RM. The golden hour: Scientific fact or medical "urban legend"? Acad Emerg Med 2001;8:758-60.  Back to cited text no. 29
[PUBMED]    
30.Stroud MH, Prodhan P, Moss MM, Anand KJ. Redefining the golden hour in pediatric transport. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2008;9:435-7.  Back to cited text no. 30
[PUBMED]    
31.Stroud MH, Prodhan P, Moss M, Fiser R, Schexnayder S, Anand K. Enhanced monitoring improves pediatric transport outcomes: A randomized controlled trial. Pediatrics 2011;127:42-8.  Back to cited text no. 31
[PUBMED]    
32.National Research Council. Accidental death and disability: The neglected disease of modern society. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences; 1966.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.Boyd DR, Lowe RJ, Baker RJ, Nyhus LM. Trauma registry. New computer method for multifactorial evaluation of a major health problem. JAMA 1973;223:422-8.  Back to cited text no. 33
[PUBMED]    
34.Moore L, Clark DE. The value of trauma registries. Injury 2008;39: 686-695.  Back to cited text no. 34
[PUBMED]    
35.Evans C, Howes D, Pickett W, Dagnone L. Audit filters for improving processes of care and clinical outcomes in trauma systems. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009:4:CD007590.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.Shafi S, Nathens AB, Cryer HG, Hemmila MR, Pasquale MD, Clark DE, et al. The Trauma Quality Improvement Program of the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma. J Am Coll Surg 2009;209:521-30 e521.  Back to cited text no. 36
[PUBMED]    
37.Willis CD, Gabbe BJ, Cameron PA. Measuring quality in trauma care. Injury 2007;38:527-37.  Back to cited text no. 37
[PUBMED]    
38.Glance LG, Dick AW, Mukamel DB, Osler TM. Association between trauma quality indicators and outcomes for injured patients. Arch Surg 2012;147:308-15.  Back to cited text no. 38
[PUBMED]    
39.Stylianos S, Nathens AB. Comparing processes of pediatric trauma care at children's hospitals versus adult hospitals. J Trauma 2007;63(6 Suppl):S96-100; discussion S106-12.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.Figaji AA, Fieggen AG, Argent A, Peter JC. Surgical treatment for "brain compartment syndrome" in children with severe head injury. S Afr Med J 2006;96:969-75.  Back to cited text no. 40
[PUBMED]    
41.Kim PK, Zhu X, Houseknecht E, Nickolaus D, Mahboubi S, Nance ML. Effective radiation dose from radiologic studies in pediatric trauma patients. World J Surg 2005;29:1557-62.  Back to cited text no. 41
[PUBMED]    
42.Smith JT, Price C, Stevens PM, Masters KS, Young M. Does pediatric orthopedic subspecialization affect hospital utilization and charges? J Pediatr Orthop 1999;19:553-5.  Back to cited text no. 42
[PUBMED]    
43.Heyworth BE, Galano GJ, Vitale MA, Vitale MG. Management of closed femoral shaft fractures in children, ages 6 to 10: National practice patterns and emerging trends. J Pediatr Orthop 2004;24:455-9.  Back to cited text no. 43
[PUBMED]    
44.Savage RC, DePompei R, Tyler J, Lash M. Paediatric traumatic brain injury: A review of pertinent issues. Pediatr Rehabil 2005;8:92-103.  Back to cited text no. 44
[PUBMED]    
45.Zumsteg JM, Ennis SK, Jaffe KM, Mangione-Smith R, MacKenzie EJ, Rivara FP. Quality of care indicators for the structure and organization of inpatient rehabilitation care of children with traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012;93:386-93.e381.  Back to cited text no. 45
    
46.Rivara FP, Ennis SK, Mangione-Smith R, MacKenzie EJ, Jaffe KM. Quality of care indicators for the rehabilitation of children with traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012;93:381-5.9.  Back to cited text no. 46
    
47.Rivara FP, Ennis SK, Mangione-Smith R, Mackenzie EJ, Jaffe KM. Variation in adherence to new quality of care indicators for the acute rehabilitation of children with traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012 Mar 21. [Epub ahead of print]  Back to cited text no. 47
    
48.Slomine B, Eikenberg J, Salorio C, Suskauer S, Trovato M, Christensen J. Preliminary evaluation of the Cognitive and Linguistic Scale: A measure to assess recovery in inpatient rehabilitation following pediatric brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2008;23:286-93.  Back to cited text no. 48
[PUBMED]    
49.Kenardy J, Le Brocque R, Hendrikz J, Iselin G, Anderson V, McKinlay L. Impact of posttraumatic stress disorder and injury severity on recovery in children with traumatic brain injury. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol.41:5-14.  Back to cited text no. 49
    
50.Rivara JM, Jaffe KM, Polissar NL, Fay GC, Liao S, Martin KM. Predictors of family functioning and change 3 years after traumatic brain injury in children. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996;77:754-64.  Back to cited text no. 50
[PUBMED]    
51.Prelack K, Dwyer J, Dallal GE, Rand WM, Yu YM, Kehayias JJ, et al. Growth deceleration and restoration after serious burn injury. J Burn Care Res 2007;28:262-8.  Back to cited text no. 51
[PUBMED]    
52.Sheridan RL, Hinson MI, Liang MH, Nackel AF, Schoenfeld DA, Ryan CM, et al. Long-term outcome of children surviving massive burns. Jama 2000;283:69-73.  Back to cited text no. 52
[PUBMED]    
53.Rice SA, Allaire J, Elgin K, Farrell W, Conaway M, Blackman JA. Effect of shortened length of stay on functional and educational outcome after pediatric rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2004;83:27-32.  Back to cited text no. 53
[PUBMED]    
54.Mehlman CT, Hubbard GW, Crawford AH, Roy DR, Wall EJ. Traumatic hip dislocation in children. Long-term followup of 42 patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2000(376):68-79.  Back to cited text no. 54
[PUBMED]    
55.Signorino PR, Densmore J, Werner M, Winthrop A, Stylianos S, Guice KS, et al. Pediatric pelvic injury: Functional outcome at 6-month follow-up. J Pediatr Surg 2005;40:107-12; discussion 112-3.  Back to cited text no. 55
[PUBMED]    
56.Upperman JS, Gardner M, Gaines B, Schall L, Ford HR. Early functional outcome in children with pelvic fractures. J Pediatr Surg 2000;35:1002-5.  Back to cited text no. 56
[PUBMED]    
57.Franklin GA, Pucci PS, Arbabi S, Brandt MM, Wahl WL, Taheri PA. Decreased juvenile arson and firesetting recidivism after implementation of a multidisciplinary prevention program. J Trauma 2002;53:260-4; discussion 264-6.  Back to cited text no. 57
[PUBMED]    
58.Dakil SR, Sakai C, Lin H, Flores G. Recidivism in the child protection system: Identifying children at greatest risk of reabuse among those remaining in the home. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2011;165:1006-12.  Back to cited text no. 58
[PUBMED]    
59.Zatzick DF, Jurkovich G, Wang J, Rivara FP. Variability in the characteristics and quality of care for injured youth treated at trauma centers. J Pediatr 2011;159:1012-6.  Back to cited text no. 59
[PUBMED]    
60.Sabin JA, Zatzick DF, Jurkovich G, Rivara FP. Primary care utilization and detection of emotional distress after adolescent traumatic injury: Identifying an unmet need. Pediatrics 2006;117:130-8.  Back to cited text no. 60
[PUBMED]    
61.Stevens MW, Hainsworth KR, Weisman SJ, Layde PM. Health-related quality of life in pediatric minor injury: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory in the emergency department. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2012;166:74-81.  Back to cited text no. 61
[PUBMED]    
62.Clancy CM, Eisenberg JM. Outcomes research: Measuring the end results of health care. Science 1998;282:245-6.  Back to cited text no. 62
[PUBMED]    
63.Gabbe BJ, Simpson PM, Sutherland AM, Palmer CS, Williamson OD, Butt W, et al. Functional and health-related quality of life outcomes after pediatric trauma. J Trauma 2011;70:1532-8.  Back to cited text no. 63
[PUBMED]    
64.Martin-Herz SP, Zatzick DF, McMahon RJ. Health-Related Quality of Life in Children and Adolescents Following Traumatic Injury: A Review. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev 2012 Apr 18. [Epub ahead of print]  Back to cited text no. 64
    
65.Eiser C, Morse R. A review of measures of quality of life for children with chronic illness. Arch Dis Child 2001;84:205-11.  Back to cited text no. 65
[PUBMED]    
66.Varni JW, Seid M, Rode CA. The PedsQL: Measurement model for the pediatric quality of life inventory. Med Care 1999;37:126-39.  Back to cited text no. 66
[PUBMED]    
67.Varni JW, Seid M, Kurtin PS. PedsQL 4.0: Reliability and validity of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory version 4.0 generic core scales in healthy and patient populations. Med Care 2001;39:800-12.  Back to cited text no. 67
    
68.Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: A new tool for rehabilitation. Adv Clin Rehabil 1987;1:6-18.  Back to cited text no. 68
[PUBMED]    
69.McCarthy ML. Measuring children's health-related quality of life after trauma. J Trauma 2007;63(6 Suppl):S122-9; discussion S130-25.  Back to cited text no. 69
    
70.Landgraf JM, Maunsell E, Speechley KN, Bullinger M, Campbell S, Abetz L, et al. Canadian-French, German and UK versions of the Child Health Questionnaire: Methodology and preliminary item scaling results. Qual Life Res 1998;7:433-45.  Back to cited text no. 70
[PUBMED]    
71.Raat H, Landgraf JM, Bonsel GJ, Gemke RJ, Essink-Bot ML. Reliability and validity of the child health questionnaire-child form (CHQ-CF87) in a Dutch adolescent population. Qual Life Res 2002;11:575-81.  Back to cited text no. 71
[PUBMED]    
72.Vogels T, Verrips GH, Verloove-Vanhorick SP, Fekkes M, Kamphuis RP, Koopman HM, et al. Measuring health-related quality of life in children: The development of the TACQOL parent form. Qual Life Res 1998;7:457-65.  Back to cited text no. 72
[PUBMED]    
73.Janssens L, Gorter JW, Ketelaar M, Kramer WL, Holtslag HR. Health-related quality-of-life measures for long-term follow-up in children after major trauma. Qual Life Res 2008;17:701-13.  Back to cited text no. 73
[PUBMED]    
74.Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Berry CC. Health status: Types of validity and the index of well-being. Health Serv Res. Winter 1976;11:478-507.  Back to cited text no. 74
[PUBMED]    
75.Kaplan RM, Ganiats TG, Sieber WJ, Anderson JP. The Quality of Well-Being Scale: Critical similarities and differences with SF-36. Int J Qual Health Care 1998;10:509-20.  Back to cited text no. 75
[PUBMED]    
76.Haley SM, Coster WI, Kao YC, Dumas HM, Fragala-Pinkham MA, Kramer JM, et al. Lessons from use of the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory: Where do we go from here? Pediatr Phys Ther 2010 Spring;22:69-75.  Back to cited text no. 76
    
77.Winthrop AL, Brasel KJ, Stahovic L, Paulson J, Schneeberger B, Kuhn EM. Quality of life and functional outcome after pediatric trauma. J Trauma 2005;58:468-73; discussion 473-64.  Back to cited text no. 77
[PUBMED]    
78.Aitken ME, McCarthy ML, Slomine BS, Ding R, Durbin DR, Jaffe KM, et al. Family burden after traumatic brain injury in children. Pediatrics 2009;123:199-206.  Back to cited text no. 78
[PUBMED]    
79.Cole WR, Paulos SK, Cole CA, Tankard C. A review of family intervention guidelines for pediatric acquired brain injuries. Dev Disabil Res Rev 2009;15:159-66.  Back to cited text no. 79
[PUBMED]    
80.Wade SL, Taylor HG, Drotar D, Stancin T, Yeates KO. Family burden and adaptation during the initial year after traumatic brain injury in children. Pediatrics 1998;102:110-6.  Back to cited text no. 80
[PUBMED]    
81.Association AP. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. Washington, DC. 4 th edition ed; 2000.  Back to cited text no. 81
    
82.Landolt MA, Vollrath M, Ribi K, Gnehm HE, Sennhauser FH. Incidence and associations of parental and child posttraumatic stress symptoms in pediatric patients. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2003;44:1199-207.  Back to cited text no. 82
[PUBMED]    
83.Brosbe MS, Hoefling K, Faust J. Predicting posttraumatic stress following pediatric injury: A systematic review. J Pediatr Psychol 2011;36:718-29.  Back to cited text no. 83
[PUBMED]    
84.Kazak AE, Kassam-Adams N, Schneider S, Zelikovsky N, Alderfer MA, Rourke M. An integrative model of pediatric medical traumatic stress. J Pediatr Psychol 2006;31:343-55.  Back to cited text no. 84
[PUBMED]    
85.Cox CM, Kenardy JA, Hendrikz JK. A meta-analysis of risk factors that predict psychopathology following accidental trauma. J Spec Pediatr Nurs 2008;13:98-110.  Back to cited text no. 85
[PUBMED]    
86.Keppel-Benson JM, Ollendick TH, Benson MJ. Post-traumatic stress in children following motor vehicle accidents. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2002;43:203-12.  Back to cited text no. 86
[PUBMED]    
87.Zatzick D, Russo J, Grossman DC, Jurkovich G, Sabin J, Berliner L, et al. Posttraumatic stress and depressive symptoms, alcohol use, and recurrent traumatic life events in a representative sample of hospitalized injured adolescents and their parents. J Pediatr Psychol 2006;31:377-87.  Back to cited text no. 87
[PUBMED]    
88.Gill AC. Risk factors for pediatric posttraumatic stress disorder after traumatic injury. Arch Psychiatr Nurs 2002;16:168-75.  Back to cited text no. 88
[PUBMED]    
89.Holbrook TL, Hoyt DB, Coimbra R, Potenza B, Sise MJ, Sack DI, et al. Trauma in adolescents causes long-term marked deficits in quality of life: Adolescent children do not recover preinjury quality of life or function up to two years postinjury compared to national norms. J Trauma 2007;62:577-83; discussion 583.  Back to cited text no. 89
[PUBMED]    
90.Winston FK, Kassam-Adams N, Garcia-Espana F, Ittenbach R, Cnaan A. Screening for risk of persistent posttraumatic stress in injured children and their parents. JAMA 2003;290:643-9.  Back to cited text no. 90
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]


This article has been cited by
1 Unintentional pediatric injuries in São Paulo. How often is it severe?
Simone de Campos Vieira Abib,Alessandra Mara Françóia,Renata Waksman,Maria Inês Dolci,Hélio Penna Guimarães,Frederico Moreira,Marcus Vinícius BoarettoCezillo,Adenauer Marinho Góes Júnior
Acta Cirurgica Brasileira. 2017; 32(7): 587
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Long-Term Function After Pediatric Critical Illness
Neethi P. Pinto,Elizabeth W. Rhinesmith,Tae Yeon Kim,Peter H. Ladner,Murray M. Pollack
Pediatric Critical Care Medicine. 2017; 18(3): e122
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 Comparison of pediatric motor vehicle collision injury outcomes at Level I trauma centers
Jill Dreyfus,Andrew Flood,Gretchen Cutler,Henry Ortega,Nathan Kreykes,Anupam Kharbanda
Journal of Pediatric Surgery. 2016;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Essex and Herts Air Ambulance: a focused case series for pre-hospital practice
Erica Ley,Tim Webb,Adam Chesters,Ben Clarke
Journal of Paramedic Practice. 2015; 7(9): 438
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 Concordance of performance metrics among US trauma centers caring for injured children
Chethan Sathya,Randall S. Burd,Michael L. Nance,Paul J. Karanicolas,Paul W. Wales,Damon C. Scales,Wei Xiong,Avery B. Nathens
Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery. 2015; 79(1): 138
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
6 A Comparison of Quality Improvement Practices at Adult and Pediatric Trauma Centers*
Carmen Gayle Cooper,Maria Jose Santana,Henry T. Stelfox
Pediatric Critical Care Medicine. 2013; 14(8): e365
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
    Trauma System Or...
    Quality Indicato...
   Conclusions
    References
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3127    
    Printed106    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded125    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 6    

Recommend this journal