TY - JOUR
T1 - Lack of regional pathways impact on surgical delay
T2 - Analysis of the Orthopaedic Trauma Hospital Outcomes–Patient Operative Delays (ORTHOPOD) study
AU - ORTHOPOD Collaborators
AU - Ahmed, Hussam Elamin
AU - Baldock, Thomas
AU - Wei, Nicholas
AU - Walshaw, Thomas
AU - Walker, Reece
AU - Trompeter, Alex
AU - Scott, Sharon
AU - Eardley, William G.P.
AU - Stevenson, Iain
AU - Yoong, Andrel
AU - Rankin, Iain
AU - Dixon, James
AU - Lim, Jun Wei
AU - Sattar, Mariam
AU - McDonald, Stephen
AU - Davies, Helen
AU - Jones, Louise
AU - Nolan, Michelle
AU - McGinty, Rebecca
AU - Stevenson, Helene
AU - Bowe, David
AU - Sim, Francis
AU - Vun, James
AU - Strain, Ritchie
AU - Giannoudis, Vasileios
AU - Talbot, Christopher
AU - Gunn, Christopher
AU - Le, Ha Phuong Do
AU - Bradley, Matthew
AU - Lloyd, William
AU - Hanratty, Brian
AU - Lim, Yizhe
AU - Brookes-Fazakerley, Steven
AU - Varasteh, Amir
AU - Francis, Jonathan
AU - Choudhry, Nameer
AU - Malik, Sheraz
AU - Vats, Amit
AU - Evans, Ashish
AU - Garner, Madeleine
AU - King, Stratton
AU - Zbaeda, Mohamed
AU - Diamond, Owen
AU - Baker, Gavin
AU - Napier, Richard
AU - Guy, Stephen
AU - McCauley, Gordon
AU - King, Samuel
AU - Edwards, Gray
AU - Lin, Benjamin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023
PY - 2023/12
Y1 - 2023/12
N2 - Introduction: 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.
AB - Introduction: 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.
KW - Ambulatory
KW - Cancellations
KW - Day-case trauma
KW - Delays
KW - Fracture
KW - Time to surgery
KW - Trauma
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85178212893&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.injury.2023.111007
DO - 10.1016/j.injury.2023.111007
M3 - Article
C2 - 37976922
AN - SCOPUS:85178212893
SN - 0020-1383
VL - 54
JO - Injury
JF - Injury
IS - 12
M1 - 111007
ER -