• Silke Aldrian, Simon Wernhart, Lukas Negrin, Gabriel Halat, Elisabeth Schwendenwein, Vilmos Vécsei, and Stefan Hajdu.
• Department of Trauma Surgery, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria. silke.aldrian.meduniwien.ac.at
• Wien. Klin. Wochenschr. 2012 Feb 1; 124 (3-4): 78-84.

IntroductionIn Austria, treatment of multiple trauma patients has developed into an established nationwide trauma center specialty with its own unique identity. Although it represents a substantial financial investment, it ensures supply at international standards. The question of whether multiple trauma patients should be treated only in specialized trauma centers or in several hospitals remains controversial on both national and international grounds. The aim of this study was to assess Austrian trauma departments for international comparison.Material And MethodsWe performed a survey of all 54 Austrian trauma departments by collecting data through questionnaires. The number of staff, potential of infrastructure, and treatment strategies were obtained.Results93.3% of the trauma departments responded to the questionnaires. In level I trauma centers the amount of trauma beds reached 11% of the total bed capacity, 13% in level II, and 18% in level III units. Level I centers showed an average of 35% of intensive care beds for trauma patients. 53% and 51% were the proportions for level II and III centers. Level I hospitals displayed an average of 28.3 trauma surgeons, while level II and III units had less doctors at their disposal in the trauma departments. On average, 94% of the patients arrived by emergency medical support at the hospital. 94% of the trauma departments used chest tubes, 70% performed craniotomies and neurovascular reconstruction. 33% of the centers were equipped to perform replantations.DiscussionThe data demonstrate the broad spectrum of polytrauma treatment in Austrian trauma centers. The discussed need for centralization of polytrauma care cannot be justified based on these data. Limiting from a medical perspective, however, is the lacking comparability of quality of care due to the currently missing objective quality criteria.

29 keywords...

hide…