The Czech Republic Register of Injuries (ÚRČR) – Experience with the Database Management in the Brno Faculty Hospital

Česká verzia

Authors: M. Krtička; L. Plánka ¹; D. Ira; M. Mašek; P. Gál ¹
Authors place of work: Klinika úrazové chirurgie FN Brno a LF MU, přednosta: doc. MUDr. Michal Mašek, CSc. ; Klinika dětské chirurgie, ortopedie a traumatologie FN Brno, přednosta: prof. MUDr. Petr Gál, Ph. D., MBA ¹
Published in the journal: Rozhl. Chir., 2009, roč. 88, č. 12, s. 716-719.
Category: Monothematic special - Original

Summary

Introduction:
Injuries are the leading cause of mortality in age group of people junior to 45 years. Central data collection is important to survey basic injury causation and trauma care quality. The Czech Trauma Registry was started in 2004. The aim of study was to discover valid statistic analysis from current data collection and its clinical practice contribution.

Patients and methods:
Doctors working in the Centre of trauma care (University hospital Brno) collect and enter data to the Trauma Registry. Data collection is practiced continuously through the hospitalization. Abbreviated Injury Scale and Injury Severity Score are used for injury severity determining. In the University hospital Brno 161 patients (159 patients met validity criterion) were entered in trauma registry.

Results:
159 patients were evaluated, Injury Severity Score was 16–75, demographically from 6 regions. Traffic accident was the most frequent cause of injury. Average inpatient age was 43 years. Mortality in our patient file was 10.7%. Investing sum for 1 patient who was returned to Trauma Registry was 209 019 Czech crowns.

Discussion:
Authors confront their results with the German Trauma Registry, results in basic parameters are analogous. Data collection should be proceeding correctly. Czech Trauma Registry should be the instrument of quality management and is waiting for its statutory provision.

Conclusion:
Trauma registry is going to afford plenty information for pre-hospital and hospital care improvement.

Key words:
injury – polytrauma – trauma registry – data collection

Zdroje

1. Sethi, D., Racioppi, F., Baumgarten, I., Vida, P. Injuries and violence in Europe: why they matter and what can be done. WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen 2006.

2. Champion, H. R., Copes, W. S., Sacco, W. J., et al. The major trauma outcome study: establishing national norms for trauma care. J Trauma 1990; 30: 1356–1365

3. Pollock, D. A., McClain, P. W. Trauma registries current status and future prospects. JAMA, 1989; 262: 2280–2283

4. Plánka, L., Starý, D., Škvařil, J., Gál, P. Národní registr dětských úrazů. Úrazová chirurgie, 2008; 3: 65–68.

5. Ministerstvo zdravotnictví České republiky: Věstník MZČR částka 6, 2008: 55–63.

6. Mann, N. C., Mullins, R. J., MacKenzie, E. J., et. al. Systematic review of published evidence regarding trauma system effectivenes. J. Trauma., 1999; 47: 25–33.

7. Frykberg, E. R. Triage: principles and practice. Scand. J. Surg., 2005; 94: 272–278.

8. American Association for Automotive Medicine. The Abbreviated Injury Scale, 2008 Revision, Arlington Heights IL 60005.

9. Champion, H. R., Sacco, W. J., Copes, W. S. Improvement in outcome from trauma centre care. Arch. Surg., 1992; 127: 333–338.

10. Ruchholtz, S., Lefering, R., Paffrath, T., Bouillon, B., Sektion NIS der DGU Traumaregister der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie. Trauma Berufskrankheit, 2007; 9: 270–278.