Development of a trauma system and optimal placement of trauma centers using geospatial mapping

The State of the Union: Trauma System Development in the United States

Injury is both a national and international epidemic that affects people of all age, race, religion, and socioeconomic class. Injury was the fourth leading cause of death in the United States (U.S.) in 2021 and results in an incalculable emotional and financial burden on our society. Despite this, when prevention fails, trauma centers allow communities to prepare to care for the traumatically injured patient. Using lessons learned from the military, trauma care has grown more sophisticated in the last 50 years. In 1966, the first civilian trauma center was established, bringing management of injury into the new age. Now, the American College of Surgeons recognizes 4 levels of trauma centers (I-IV), with select states recognizing Level V trauma centers. The introduction of trauma centers in the U.S. has been proven to reduce morbidity and mortality for the injured patient. However, despite the proven benefits of trauma centers, the U.S. lacks a single, unified, trauma system and instead operates within a "system of systems" creating vast disparities in the level of care that can be received, especially in rural and economically disadvantaged areas. In this review we present the history of trauma system development in the U.S, define the different levels of trauma centers, present evidence that trauma systems and trauma centers improve outcomes, outline the current state of trauma system development in the U.S, and briefly mention some of the current challenges and opportunities in trauma system development in the U.S. today.

Geographic Information Systems Mapping of Trauma Center Development in Florida

INTRODUCTION

There has been a substantial increase in the number of trauma centers (TCs) opened in the US over the past decade which coincided with population increases and policy changes. Our hypotheses were that new TC locations would likely be related to the socioeconomic profile of the surrounding locale-likely favoring higher-income areas-and that hospital ownership status may play a role in the distribution of new centers. Our aim was to use geographic information systems (GIS) analysis to evaluate the growth of an established regional TC and to delineate factors associated with the site chosen for new centers.

METHODS

ARC-GIS mapping software was utilized to generate a map of all TCs within two Florida metropolitan areas-Jacksonville and Miami. Hospital ownership was classified as for-profit (FP) or government, and opening dates were obtained from publicly available data. US census data (2020) was utilized to add sociodemographic data (race, income, insurance status) by zip code.

RESULTS

The majority of newer TCs opened in Duval/Clay and Dade/Broward counties were FP. GIS mapping demonstrated that 100% of new TCs demonstrated higher mean charges compared to established TC and were located in higher-income neighborhoods where residents were more likely to have health insurance with fewer African-American residents.

CONCLUSIONS

Most TCs added to two of the largest metropolitan areas within Florida over the past decade were FP. These TCs demonstrated higher mean charges and tended to be located in areas of higher-income neighborhoods with better insured residents and fewer African-Americans. Such data suggest that more oversight is potentially needed to regulate and organize trauma system development to address trauma need rather than financial incentive alone.

Open-source code maps traumas for targeting interventions: Applying the model to compare penetrating traumas with "Stop the Bleed" training locations

BACKGROUND

To improve equitable access to geospatial analysis, a free open-source R package, called Rosymap, was created to map trauma incident locations.

METHODS

To demonstrate the R package, penetrating trauma events for all patients who received care at a level one trauma center, and the locations of all "Stop the Bleed" training locations between 2019 and 2022 were geospatially analyzed.

RESULTS

The level one trauma center treated 1531 patients for penetrating traumas between 2019 and 2022. Using Rosymap, a map was produced showing the poor overlap in distribution between penetrating traumas and "Stop the Bleed" training locations.

CONCLUSION

Rosymap, a free open-source GIS R package, visualized that the majority of "Stop the Bleed" training locations were not performed within clusters of penetrating traumas serviced by our level one trauma center. These results suggest that trauma providers and public health advocates should consider geospatial analysis when planning interventions and when attempting to choose locations equitably and accurately. To facilitate and promote the implementation of geospatial analysis, Rosymap is available as open-source code.

Changes in payer mix of new and established trauma centers: the new trauma center money grab?

Background

Although timely access to trauma center (TC) care for injured patients is essential, the proliferation of new TCs does not always improve outcomes. Hospitals may seek TC accreditation for financial reasons, rather than to address community or geographic need. Introducing new TCs risks degrading case and payer mix at established TCs. We hypothesized that newly accredited TCs would see a disproportionate share of commercially insured patients.

Study design

We collected data from all accredited adult TCs in Pennsylvania using the state trauma registry from 1999 to 2018. As state policy regarding supplemental reimbursement for underinsured patients changed in 2004, we compared patient characteristics and payer mix between TCs established before and after 2004. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the relationship between payer and presentation to a new versus established TC in recent years.

Results

Over time, there was a 40% increase in the number of TCs from 23 to 38. Of 326 204 patients from 2010 to 2018, a total of 43 621 (13.4%) were treated at 15 new TCs. New TCs treated more blunt trauma and less severely injured patients (p<0.001). In multivariable analysis, patients presenting to new TCs were more likely to have Medicare (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.9 to 2.1) and commercial insurance (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.5 to 1.6) compared with Medicaid. Over time, fewer patients at established TCs and more patients at new TCs had private insurance.

Conclusions

With the opening of new centers, payer mix changed unfavorably at established TCs. Trauma system development should consider community and regional needs, as well as impact on existing centers to ensure financial sustainability of TCs caring for vulnerable patients.

Level of evidence

Level III, prognostic/epidemiological.

Impact of lower level trauma center proliferation on patient outcomes

Background

In attempt to increase trauma system coverage, our state added 21 level 3 (L3TC) and level 4 trauma centers (L4TC) to the existing 7 level 1 trauma centers from 2008 to 2012. This study examined the impact of adding these lower-level trauma centers (LLTC) on patient outcomes.

Methods

Patients in the state trauma registry age ≥ 15 from 2007 to 2012 were queried for demographic, injury, and outcome variables. These were compared between 2007 (PRE) and 2008-2012 (POST) cohorts. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess independent predictors of mortality. Subgroup analyses were performed for Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥15, age ≥ 65, and trauma mechanisms.

Results

143,919 adults were evaluated. POST had significantly more female, geriatric, and blunt traumas (all p < 0.001). ISS was similar. Interfacility transfers increased by 10.2 %. Overall mortality decreased by 0.6 % (p < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that being in POST was not associated with survival (OR: 1.07, CI: 0.96-1.18, p = 0.227). Subgroup analyses showed small reductions in mortality, except for geriatric patients. After adjusting for covariates, POST was not associated with survival in any subgroup, and trended toward being a predictor for death in penetrating traumas (OR: 1.23; 1.00-1.53, p = 0.059).

Conclusions

Unregulated proliferation of LLTCs was associated with increased interfacility transfers without significant increase in trauma patients treated. LLTC proliferation was not an independent protector against mortality in the overall cohort and may worsen mortality for penetrating trauma patients. Rather than simply increasing the number of LLTCs within a region, perhaps more planned approaches are needed.

Key message

This is, to our knowledge, the first work to study the effect of rapid lower level trauma center proliferation on patient outcomes. The findings of our analysis have implications for strategic planning of future trauma systems.

American Trauma Care: A System of Systems

OBJECTIVE

The benefits of organized trauma systems have been well-documented during 50 years of trauma system development in the United States. Unfortunately, despite this evidence, trauma system development has occurred only sporadically in the 50 states.

METHODS

The relevant literature related to trauma system design and development was reviewed based on relevance to the study. Information from these sources was summarized into a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis.

RESULTS

Strengths discovered were leadership brought forth by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma and meaningful change generated from The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report addressing the fractionation of the nation's trauma systems, whereas weaknesses included patient outcome disparities due to the lack of a national governing authority, undertriage, underresourced rural trauma, and underfunded trauma research. Opportunities included the creation of level IV trauma centers; telemedicine; the development of rural trauma management courses; air medical transport to bring high-intensity care to the patient, particularly in rural areas; trauma research; and trauma prevention through outreach and educational programs. The following threats were determined: mass casualty incidents, motor vehicle collisions because of the high rate of motor vehicle collision deaths in the United States relative to other developed countries, and underfunded trauma systems.

CONCLUSION

Much work remains to be done in the development of an American trauma system. Recommendations include implementation of trauma care governance at the federal level; national oversight and support of emergency medical services systems, particularly in rural areas with strict reporting processes for emergency medical services programs; national organization of our mass casualty response; increased federal and state funding allocated to trauma centers; a consistent model for trauma system development; and trauma research.

Developing a National Trauma Research Action Plan: Results from the trauma systems and informatics panel Delphi survey

BACKGROUND

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016 report on the trauma care system recommended establishing a National Trauma Research Action Plan to strengthen and guide future trauma research. To address this recommendation, the Department of Defense funded a study to generate a comprehensive research agenda spanning the trauma and burn care continuum. Panels were created to conduct a gap analysis and identify high-priority research questions. The National Trauma Research Action Plan panel reported here addressed trauma systems and informatics.

METHODS

Experts were recruited to identify current gaps in trauma systems research, generate research questions, and establish the priorities using an iterative Delphi survey approach from November 2019 through August 2020. Panelists were identified to ensure heterogeneity and generalizability, including military and civilian representation. Panelists were encouraged to use a PICO format to generate research questions: patient/population, intervention, compare/control, and outcome. In subsequent surveys, panelists prioritized each research question on a 9-point Likert scale, categorized as low-, medium-, and high-priority items. Consensus was defined as ≥60% agreement.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven subject matter experts generated 570 research questions, of which 427 (75%) achieved the consensus threshold. Of the consensus reaching questions, 209 (49%) were rated high priority, 213 (50%) medium priority, and 5 (1%) low priority. Gaps in understanding the broad array of interventions were identified, including those related to health care infrastructure, technology products, education/training, resuscitation, and operative intervention. The prehospital phase of care was highlighted as an area needing focused research.

CONCLUSION

This Delphi gap analysis of trauma systems and informatics research identified high-priority research questions that will help guide investigators and funding agencies in setting research priorities to continue to work toward Zero Preventable Deaths after trauma.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Optimizing Trauma Systems: A Geospatial Analysis of the Victorian State Trauma System

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop a data-driven approach to assessing the influence of trauma system parameters and optimizing the configuration of the Victorian State Trauma System (VSTS).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Regionalized trauma systems have been shown to reduce the risk of mortality and improve patient function and health-related quality of life. However, major trauma case numbers are rapidly increasing and there is a need to evolve the configuration of trauma systems.

METHODS

A retrospective review of major trauma patients from 2016 to 2018 in Victoria, Australia. Drive times and flight times were calculated for transport to each of 138 trauma receiving hospitals. Changes to the configuration of the VSTS were modeled using a Mixed Integer Linear Programming algorithm across 156 simulations.

RESULTS

There were 8327 patients included in the study, of which 58% were transported directly to a major trauma service (MTS). For adult patients, the proportion of patients transported directly to an MTS increased with higher transport time limit, greater probability of helicopter emergency medical service utilization, and lower hospital patient threshold numbers. The proportion of adult patients transported directly to an MTS varied from 66% to 90% across simulations. Across all simulations for pediatric patients, only 1 pediatric MTS was assigned.

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed a robust and data-driven approach to optimizing trauma systems. Through the use of geospatial and mathematical models, we have modeled how potential future changes to trauma system characteristics may impact on the optimal configuration of the system, which will enable policy makers to make informed decisions about health service planning into the future.

Accessibility of HIV Services in Philadelphia: Location-Allocation Analysis

INTRODUCTION

As the first step in the HIV care continuum, timely diagnosis is central to reducing transmission of the virus and ending the HIV epidemic. Studies have shown that distance from a testing site is essential for ease of access to services and educational material. This study shows how location-allocation analysis can be used to improve allocation of HIV testing services utilizing existing publicly available data from 2015 to 2019 on HIV prevalence, testing site location, and factors related to HIV in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

METHODS

The ArcGIS Location-Allocation analytic tool was used to calculate locations for HIV testing sites using a method that minimizes the distance between demand-point locations and service facilities. ZIP code level demand was initially specified on the basis of the percentage of late HIV diagnoses and in a sensitivity analysis on the basis of a composite of multiple factors. Travel time and distance from demand to facilities determined the facility location allocation. This analysis was conducted from 2021 to 2022.

RESULTS

Compared with the 37 facilities located in 20 (43%) Philadelphia ZIP codes, the model proposed reallocating testing facilities to 37 (79%) ZIP codes using percent late diagnoses to define demand. On average, this would reduce distance to the facilities by 65% and travel time to the facilities by 56%. Results using the sensitivity analysis were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

A wider distribution of HIV testing services across the city of Philadelphia may reduce distance and travel time to facilities, improve accessibility of testing, and in turn increase the percentage of people with knowledge of their status.

Association Between Geospatial Access to Care and Firearm Injury Mortality in Philadelphia

Importance

The burden of firearm violence in US cities continues to rise. The role of access to trauma center care as a trauma system measure with implications for firearm injury mortality has not been comprehensively evaluated.

Objective

To evaluate the association between geospatial access to care and firearm injury mortality in an urban trauma system.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Retrospective cohort study of all people 15 years and older shot due to interpersonal violence in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, between January 1, 2015, and August 9, 2021.

Exposures

Geospatial access to care, defined as the predicted ground transport time to the nearest trauma center for each person shot, derived by geospatial network analysis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Risk-adjusted mortality estimated using hierarchical logistic regression. The population attributable fraction was used to estimate the proportion of fatalities attributable to disparities in geospatial access to care.

Results

During the study period, 10 105 people (910 [9%] female and 9195 [91%] male; median [IQR] age, 26 [21-28] years; 8441 [84%] Black, 1596 [16%] White, and 68 other [<1%], including Asian and unknown, consolidated owing to small numbers) were shot due to interpersonal violence in Philadelphia. Of these, 1999 (20%) died. The median (IQR) predicted transport time was 5.6 (3.8-7.2) minutes. After risk adjustment, each additional minute of predicted ground transport time was associated with an increase in odds of mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.03 per minute; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05). Calculation of the population attributable fraction using mortality rate ratios for incremental 1-minute increases in predicted ground transport time estimated that 23% of shooting fatalities could be attributed to differences in access to care, equivalent to 455 deaths over the study period.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings indicate that geospatial access to care may be an important trauma system measure, improvements to which may result in reduced deaths from gun violence in US cities.

Building trauma capability: using geospatial analysis to consider military treatment facilities for trauma center development

Background

The Military Health System must develop and sustain experienced surgical trauma teams while facing decreased surgical volumes both during and between deployments. Military trauma resources may enhance local trauma systems by accepting civilian patients for care at military treatment facilities (MTFs). Some MTFs may be able to augment their regional trauma systems by developing trauma center (TC) capabilities. The aim of this study was to evaluate the geographical proximity of MTFs to the continental US (CONUS) population and relative to existing civilian adult TCs, and then to determine which MTFs might benefit most from TC development.

Methods

Publicly available data were used to develop a list of CONUS adult civilian level 1 and level 2 TCs and also to generate a list of CONUS MTFs. Census data were used to estimate adult population densities across zip codes. Distances were calculated between zip codes and civilian TCs and MTFs. The affected population sizes and reductions in distance were tabulated for every zip code that was found to be closer to an MTF than an existing TC.

Results

562 civilian adult level 1 and level 2 TCs and 33 military medical centers and hospitals were identified. Compared with their closest civilian TCs, MTFs showed mean reductions in distance ranging from 0 to 30 miles, affecting populations ranging from 12 000 to over 900 000 adults. Seven MTFs were identified that would offer clinically significant reductions in distance to relatively large population centers.

Discussion

Some MTFs may offer decreased transit times and improved care to large adult populations within their regional trauma systems by developing level 1 or level 2 TC capabilities. The results of this study provide recommendations to focus further study on seven MTFs to identify those that merit further development and integration with their local trauma systems.

Level of evidence

IV.

A comprehensive analysis of undertriage in a mature trauma system using geospatial mapping

INTRODUCTION

The correct triage of trauma patients to trauma centers (TCs) is essential. We sought to determine the percentage of patients who were undertriaged within the Pennsylvania (PA) trauma system and spatially analyze areas of undertriage (UTR) in PA for all age groups: pediatric, adult, and geriatric. We hypothesized that there would be certain areas that had high UTR for all age groups.

METHODS

From 2003 to 2015, all admissions from the Pennsylvania Trauma Systems Foundation registry and those meeting trauma criteria (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Diseases: 800-959) from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council (PHC4) database were included. Admissions were divided into age groups: pediatric (<15 years), adult (15-64 years), and geriatric (≥65 years). All pediatric trauma cases were included from the Pennsylvania Trauma Systems Foundation and PHC4 registry, while only cases with Injury Severity Score of >9 were included in adult and geriatric age groups. Undertriage was defined as patients not admitted to level I/II adult TCs (n = 24), pediatric (n = 3), or adult and pediatric combined facility (n = 3) divided by the total number of patients from the PHC4 database. ArcGIS Desktop (version 10.7; ESRI, Redlands, CA) and GeoDa (version 1.14.0; CSDS, Chicago, IL) open source license were used for geospatial mapping of UTR with a spatial empirical Bayesian smoothed UTR by zip code tabulation area (ZCTA) and Stata (version 16.1; Stata Corp., College Station, TX) for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

There were significant percentages of UTR for all age groups. One area of high UTR for all age groups had TCs and large nontrauma centers in close proximity. There were high rates of UTR for all ages in rural areas, specifically in the upper central regions of PA, with limited access to TCs.

CONCLUSION

It appears there are two patterns leading to UTR. The first is in areas where TCs are in close proximity to large competing nontrauma centers, which may lead to inappropriate triage. The second has to do with lack of access to TCs. Geospatial mapping is a valuable tool that can be used to ascertain where trauma systems should focus scarce resources to decrease UTR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Epidemiological, level III; Care management, level III.

Enhancing trauma registries by integrating traffic records and geospatial analysis to improve bicyclist safety

BACKGROUND

Trauma registries are used to identify modifiable injury risk factors for trauma prevention efforts. However, these may miss factors useful for prevention of bicycle-automobile collisions, such as vehicle speeds, driver intoxication, street conditions, and neighborhood characteristics. We hypothesize that (GIS) analysis of trauma registry data matched with a traffic accident database could identify risk factors for bicycle-automobile injuries and better inform injury prevention efforts.

METHODS

The trauma registry of a US Level I trauma center was used retrospectively to identify bicycle-motor vehicle collision admissions from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2018. Data collected included demographics, vitals, injury severity scores, toxicology, helmet use, and mortality.Matching with the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System was done to provide collision, victim and GIS information. The GIS mapping of collisions was done with census tract data including poverty level scoring. Incident hot spot analysis to identify statistically significant incident clusters was done using the Getis Ord Gi* statistic.

RESULTS

Of 25,535 registry admissions, 531 (2.1%) were bicyclists struck by automobiles, 425 (80.0%) were matched to Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System. Younger age (odds ratio [OR], 1.026; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.013-1.040, p < 0.001), higher census tract poverty level percentage (OR, 0.976; 95% CI, 0.959-0.993, p = 0.007), and high school or less education (OR, 0.60; 95 CI, 0.381-0.968; p = 0.036) were predictive of not wearing a helmet. Higher census tract poverty level percentage (OR, 1.019; 95% CI, 1.004-1.034; p = 0.012) but not educational level was predictive of toxicology positive-bicyclists in automobile collisions. Geographic information systems analysis identified hot spots in the catchment area for toxicology-positive bicyclists and lack of helmet use.

CONCLUSION

Combining trauma registry data and matched traffic accident records data with GIS analysis identifies additional risk factors for bicyclist injury. Trauma centers should champion efforts to prospectively link public traffic accident data to their trauma registries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological, level III.

A cross-sectional study of trauma certification and hospital referral region diversity: A system theory approach

BACKGROUND

There are clear racial/ethnic disparities in the trauma care service delivery. However, no study has examined the relationships between structural determinants of trauma care designations (L-I through L-IV) or verification and social factors of the surrounding health region in the U.S.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the relationship between U.S. community segregation in a hospital referral region (HRR) and hospitals' attainment of trauma certification and trauma designation L-I/II.

METHODS

Two-year retrospective analysis of 2,348 acute hospitals that participated in the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) Program. Multivariate Poisson and 1:2 matching ratio using Propensity Score Matching regressions were used. Our primary variables were composite segregation scores for each county-aggregated to the HRR level (n=303)-and hospital performance on the HVBP Program.

RESULTS

Segregated HRRs are 69% and 40% less likely to have an increase in the number of hospitals with trauma care designations L-I/II and trauma certification, respectively. Our matching ratio showed that hospitals with trauma certification or hospitals with trauma care designations L-I/II were more likely to be within HRRs with lower community diversity.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight that system disparities exist in trauma care. Research is needed to determine if other factors, such as resource allocation and reimbursement distribution, impact the availability of trauma facilities.

Comparing geographic information system-based estimates with trauma center registry data to assess the effects of additional trauma centers on system access

BACKGROUND

Geographic information systems (GISs) are often used to analyze trauma systems. Geographic information system-based approaches can model access to a trauma center (TC), including estimates of transport time and population coverage, when accurate trauma registry and emergency medical systems (EMS) data are not available. We hypothesized that estimates of trauma system performance calculated using a standard GIS method with public data would be comparable with trauma registry data.

METHODS

A standardized GIS-based method was used to estimate metrics of TC access in a regional trauma system in which the number of TCs increased from one to three during a 3-year period. Registry data from the index TC in the system were evaluated for different periods during this evolution. The number of admissions to the TC in different periods was compared with changes predicted by the GIS-based model, and the distribution of observed ground-based transportation times was compared with the predicted distribution.

RESULTS

With the addition of two TCs to the system, the volume of patients transported by ground to the index TC decreased by 30%. However, the model predicted a 68% decrease in population having the shortest predicted transport time to the index TC. The model predicted the geographic trend seen in the registry data, but many patients were transported to the index TC even though it was not the closest center. Observed transport times were uniformly shorter than predicted times.

CONCLUSION

The GIS-based model qualitatively predicted changes in distribution of trauma patients, but registry data highlight that field triage decisions are more complex than model assumptions. Similarly, transport times were systematically overestimated. This suggests that model assumptions, such as vehicle speed, based on normal traffic may not fully reflect emergency medical systems (EMS) operations. There remains great need for metrics to guide policy based on widely available data.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Epidemiological, level III.

Geographic Coverage and Verification of Trauma Centers in a Rural State: Highlighting the Utility of Location Allocationfor Trauma System Planning

BACKGROUND

Care at verified trauma centers has improved survival and functional outcomes, yet determining the appropriate location of potential trauma centers is often driven by factors other than optimizing system-level patient care. Given the importance of transport time in trauma, we analyzed trauma transport patterns in a rural state lacking an organized trauma system and implemented a geographic information system to inform potential future trauma center locations.

STUDY DESIGN

Data were collected on trauma ground transport during a 3-year period (2014 through 2016) from the Statewide Incident Reporting Network database. Geographic information system mapping and location-allocation modeling of the best-fit facility for trauma center verification was computed using trauma transport patterns, population density, road network layout, and 60-minute emergency medical services transport time based on current transport protocols.

RESULTS

Location-allocation modeling identified 2 regional facilities positioned to become the next verified trauma centers. The proportion of the Vermont population without access to trauma center care within 60 minutes would be reduced from the current 29.68% to 5.81% if the identified facilities become verified centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Through geospatial mapping and location-allocation modeling, we were able to identify gaps and suggest optimal trauma center locations to maximize population coverage in a rural state lacking a formal, organized trauma system. These findings could inform future decision-making for targeted capacity improvement and system design that emphasizes more equitable access to trauma center care in Vermont.

Developing emergency care systems: a human rights-based approach

The delivery of emergency care is an effective strategy to reduce the global burden of disease. Emergency care cross cuts traditional disease-focused disciplines to manage a wide range of the acute illnesses and injuries that contribute substantially to death and disability, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. While the universal health coverage (UHC) movement is gaining support, and human rights and health systems are integral to UCH, few concrete discussions on the human right to emergency care have been taken place to date. Furthermore, no rights-based approach to developing emergency care systems has been proposed. In this article, we explore key components of the right to health (that is, availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality of health facilities, goods and services) as they relate to emergency care systems. We propose the use of a rights-based framework for the fulfilment of core obligations of the right to health and the progressive realization of emergency care in all countries.

Optimizing access and configuration of trauma centre care in New South Wales

INTRODUCTION

Getting the right patient, to the right place, at the right time is dependent on a multitude of modifiable and non-modifiable factors. One potentially modifiable factor is the number and location of trauma centres (TC). Overabundance of TC dilutes volumes and could be associated with worse outcomes. We describe a methodology that evaluates trauma system reconfiguration without reductions in potential access to care. We used the mature trauma system of New South Wales (NSW) as a model given the perceived overabundance of urban major trauma centres (MTC).

METHODS

We first evaluated potential access to TC care via ground and air transport through the use of geographic information systems (GIS) network analysis. Potential access was defined as the proportion of the population living within 60-min transport time from a potential scene of injury to a TC by ground or rotary-wing aircraft. Sensitivity analyses were carried out in order to account for potential pre-hospital interventions and/or transport delays; travel times of 15-, 30-, 45-, 60-, and 90-min were also analyzed. We then evaluated if the current configuration of the system (number of urban MTS in the Sydney basin) could be optimized without reductions in potential access to care using two GIS methodologies: location-allocation and individual removal of MTC.

RESULTS

86% of the NSW population has potential access to a TC within 60 min ground travel time; potential access improves to 99% with rotary-wing transport. The 1% of the population without potential TC access lives in 48% of the land area (>384,000km2). Utilizing two different methodologies we identified that there was no change in potential access by ground transport after removing 1 or 2 MTC in the Sydney basin at the 30-, 45-, and 60-min transport times. However, 0.02% and 0.5% of the population would not have potential access to MTC care at 15 min after removing one and two MTC respectively.

DISCUSSION

Redistribution of the number of MTC in the Sydney basin could be achieved without a significant impact on potential access to care. Our approach can be utilized as an initial tool to evaluate a trauma system where overabundance of coverage is present.