コーパス検索結果 (1語後でソート)
通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 s and hospitals without a trauma center (non-trauma centers).
2 1, was conducted at a university-based urban trauma center.
3 nors treated at a major metropolitan level I trauma center.
4 neral surgery patients admitted to a level I trauma center.
5 l trial was conducted at a single US level I trauma center.
6 rall, 54.5% in 2009 were admitted to the non-trauma center.
7 1, 2010, through May 31, 2011, at a level I trauma center.
8 rect transport from the scene of injury to a trauma center.
9 on 741 transfused trauma patients at a large trauma center.
10 d was defined as residing within 1 hour of a trauma center.
11 the level of injury severity and the type of trauma center.
12 the proportion of hospitals designated as a trauma center.
13 Single-institution level 1 trauma center.
14 California, Davis Medical Center, a level I trauma center.
15 criteria for immediate transfer to a Level I Trauma Center.
16 iage of injured patients from the field to a trauma center.
17 was conducted at an urban, academic, level I trauma center.
18 April 2005 and September 2007 at our level I trauma center.
19 al injury being transported immediately to a trauma center.
20 .9% (n = 2378) received care at a designated trauma center.
21 ll TSCI patients be taken to a level I or II trauma center.
22 f major trauma patients admitted to a single trauma center.
23 T) over an 8-year period at an urban level 1 trauma center.
24 n open M&M conference at an academic level I trauma center.
25 Level 1 trauma center.
26 rely injured children at a level 1 pediatric trauma center.
27 of 424 trauma patients admitted to a level 1 Trauma Center.
28 parison study at an urban, academic, level I trauma center.
29 merican College of Surgeons-verified Level I trauma center.
30 Level I trauma center.
31 92 (10.4%) were transferred to a designated trauma center.
32 tember 2014 to May 2015 at an urban, level 1 trauma center.
33 an of the head) who presented to our level I trauma center.
34 and, and Washington, DC, to a single level I trauma center.
35 es targeting youth violence prevention at US trauma centers.
36 tcomes in 20 state-designated levels 1 and 2 trauma centers.
37 ng reductions in alcohol intake across the 3 trauma centers.
38 ic decision instrument study at 9 US level I trauma centers.
39 n injury at all Canadian level 1 and level 2 trauma centers.
40 g and intervention procedures for PTSD at US trauma centers.
41 cit variation in diagnostic threshold across trauma centers.
42 ith similarly injured patients treated at US trauma centers.
43 attributed to the geographic distribution of trauma centers.
44 nd emergency services to level I or level II trauma centers.
45 y to severely injured patients to Level I/II Trauma Centers.
46 udy of 67,124 trauma patients admitted to 73 trauma centers.
47 children and adults to the most appropriate trauma centers.
48 been identified based on access to pediatric trauma centers.
49 cular repair is becoming commonplace in many trauma centers.
50 vival rates of MT patients vary widely among trauma centers.
51 uld translate into improvements for civilian trauma centers.
52 should be considered in the verification of trauma centers.
53 d at trauma centers and those treated at non-trauma centers.
54 ult tertiary hospital with regional burn and trauma centers.
55 in patients admitted to the 131 contributing trauma centers.
56 n be feasibly and effectively delivered from trauma centers.
57 re retrospectively identified at two level 1 trauma centers.
58 Three U.S. trauma centers.
59 nts who underwent definitive fixation at 216 trauma centers.
60 die than were patients treated in designated trauma centers.
61 ence of a survival benefit from treatment at trauma centers.
62 randomized, double-blind study at 5 level 1 trauma centers.
63 f TBI patients evaluated in less specialized trauma centers.
64 he hopes of increasing the role of level III trauma centers.
69 In Cook County, Illinois, where there are 19 trauma centers, 2842 of 9886 (28.7%) firearm-related inj
70 , managers, or coordinators representing 254 trauma centers (66% response rate) rated 12 criteria to
71 ficantly lower at trauma centers than at non-trauma centers (7.6 percent vs. 9.5 percent; relative ri
73 , trauma center and helicopter distribution, trauma center access, traffic congestion, and urbanicity
75 alysis, paralysis was significantly lower at trauma centers (adjusted odds ratio 0.67; 95% confidence
76 tly better survival in level I than level II trauma centers (adjusted P = 0.017 and 0.023, respective
78 rely injured patients are not transferred to trauma centers after initially being seen at non-trauma
79 ents transported by helicopter left level II trauma centers against medical advice (0.5% vs 1.0%, P <
80 ients treated in 18 hospitals with a level 1 trauma center and 51 hospitals non-trauma centers locate
81 is provided in a trauma center than in a non-trauma center and argue for continued efforts at regiona
83 s received surgical care at the regional eye trauma center and had significantly lower adjusted mean
84 ing helicopter utilization, injury severity, trauma center and helicopter distribution, trauma center
87 of traumatic brain injury (TBI) at a level I trauma center and the utilization of resources as a resu
88 iving proximity to the nearest level I or II trauma center and/or rural designation in the Centers fo
90 ischarge) were compared among level I and II trauma centers and between centers within the same level
92 military health care facilities and civilian trauma centers and hospitals between January 1, 2006, an
93 ned differences in mortality between level 1 trauma centers and hospitals without a trauma center (no
95 idemiologic and quality-improvement data for trauma centers and is particularly important under rapid
96 rural areas were cared for outside of major trauma centers and most rural trauma deaths occurred ear
100 able differences between patients treated at trauma centers and those treated at non-trauma centers.
101 t of the evolving epidemiology of injury, of trauma centers and trauma systems, and of blood safety a
102 that required transport to US level I or II trauma centers and whose data were recorded in the 2007-
103 f 264 casualties were transported to level 1 trauma centers, and 22 (13.4%) required ophthalmology co
104 ity was significantly lower among designated trauma centers (aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83-0.94) and highes
105 me and specialization seen at a regional eye trauma center are associated with lower costs in the sur
108 al guidelines to triage all such patients to trauma centers are followed little more than half the ti
109 en compared with nontrauma center hospitals, trauma centers are larger, more likely to be teaching ho
110 y occur where transport distances to level I trauma centers are substantial and few level I centers e
111 nsertion at Boston Medical Center (a level I trauma center at Boston University School of Medicine) b
113 PTCs), mixed trauma centers (MTCs), or adult trauma centers (ATCs) offer a survival benefit compared
114 (PTCs) compared with those treated at adult trauma centers (ATCs), differences in mortality have not
116 for major injury to a Canadian level I or II trauma center between April 1, 2006, and March 31, 2012.
117 erate or major injury admissions to an adult trauma center between April 1, 2006, and March 31, 2012.
118 merican College of Surgeons-verified level I trauma center between August 1, 2011, and January 1, 201
119 ears or older admitted to a level 1 academic trauma center between January 1, 2006, and December 31,
120 who underwent abdominopelvic CT at a level 1 trauma center between January 2004 and June 2006 were en
121 the intensive care unit of a single level I trauma center between January 2011 and May 2014 were ana
123 nts transported from the scene to 16 level 1 trauma centers between July 2005 and June 2006 were revi
125 rted from the scene of injury to our level I trauma center by air or ground (January 1, 2000-December
126 Hospitals are designated or certified as trauma centers by a state or regional authority or verif
127 tion (18.2%) of those transported to level I trauma centers by helicopter were discharged to rehabili
128 a state or regional authority or verified as trauma centers by the American College of Surgeons Commi
129 lthough the future performance of individual trauma centers can be predicted using performance metric
130 create a new paradigm in which high-quality trauma centers can serve as learning laboratories to ide
136 l personnel determine which patients require trauma center care, but they are not recommended as the
140 atients, 10,237 (38%) had realized access to trauma center care; patients in only 4 counties (8%) had
141 40,711 persons (60%) had potential access to trauma center care; persons in 11 counties (22%) had hig
142 c emergency departments in level I pediatric trauma centers (Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of Uni
145 over time, and cases managed at MTS (level-1 trauma centers) demonstrated better functional outcomes.
146 effect of American College of Surgeons (ACS) trauma center designation and trauma volume on outcome i
147 ified on the basis of ED patient volumes and trauma center designation and were analyzed statisticall
151 proportion of patients treated in designated trauma centers died during the first 24 hours of hospita
152 ncreased among children (14.0 cases per 1000 trauma center discharges in 2007 to 18.5 case per 1000 t
153 ter discharges in 2007 to 18.5 case per 1000 trauma center discharges in 2012; P = .001) and adults (
155 rease in risk-adjusted mortality in Canadian trauma centers during the study period, representing 248
157 9, a total of 4513 observations from 636 non-trauma center EDs were available for analysis, represent
158 h severe injuries initially evaluated at non-trauma center EDs were less likely to be transferred if
159 fied 118 patients who presented to a level 1 trauma center emergency department and who underwent dua
162 ce; their career in a tertiary care, level 1 trauma center environment is unlikely to be sustainable.
163 eir use in military settings and in civilian trauma centers, explored for several years, is not repor
164 ured individuals treated at an urban level I trauma center following the crash of Asiana Airlines fli
165 tient trauma deaths at a high-volume level I trauma center from 1996 to 2004 inclusive were audited.
166 h abdominal gunshot injuries admitted to our trauma center from April 1, 2004 to September 30, 2009.
168 related specialties at an academic, level I trauma center from December 1, 2011, through January 31,
169 rauma US examinations performed at a level I trauma center from January 1995 to June 2002 was conduct
171 lled adult trauma patients seen at a level I trauma center from March 1, 2010, to March 5, 2014.
172 nts (age >/= 16) presenting alive to level 1 trauma centers from 2002 to 2005 with blunt or penetrati
173 Modification, who were admitted to 2 level I trauma centers from January 1, 2008, through December 31
174 Trauma patients admitted to a single French trauma center had an equal chance of survival compared w
180 n model, for patients transported to level I trauma centers, helicopter transport was associated with
184 accounting of the number and distribution of trauma centers identified 471 trauma centers in the Unit
187 ality outcomes between patients treated at a trauma center in France and matched patients in the Unit
189 ured patients who arrived at 1 of 12 level I trauma centers in North America directly from the scene
193 there is no standardized method to benchmark trauma centers in terms of in-hospital complications, to
194 al Hermann Hospital, one of only two level I trauma centers in the community, lost electrical power,
198 emonstrates broad implementation in verified trauma centers in the United States, Canada, and Austral
199 The criteria were then sent to 384 verified trauma centers in the United States, Canada, Australia,
200 loped by the panel were sent to 133 verified trauma centers in the United States, Canada, Australia,
209 cidence of secondary overtriage in our rural trauma center is 26%, with head and neck injuries being
210 ty of spiral computed tomography scanners in trauma centers limits the use of transesophageal echocar
213 atients with acute TBI admitted to 3 level I trauma centers (<24 hours after injury) and 21 patients
218 ether pediatric trauma centers (PTCs), mixed trauma centers (MTCs), or adult trauma centers (ATCs) of
221 patients with moderate-to-severe injuries to trauma centers occurred infrequently, with significant v
222 o adult major trauma patients from 2 level 1 trauma centers (October 2006 to March 2007) were followe
223 ort study of adults admitted to the 57 adult trauma centers of a Canadian integrated trauma system (2
226 en the prevalent use of abdominopelvic CT in trauma centers, opportunistic screening for radiologic i
230 all patients with BAI admitted to a level 1 trauma center over a period of 12 years were reviewed fo
232 ient volumes (P =.005) and the presence of a trauma center (P =.02) each significantly increases the
233 a femoral shaft fracture at a level I or II trauma center participating in ACS TQIP (2012-2015) were
235 ty in delayed fixation (>/=24 hours) between trauma centers participating in the American College of
236 anuary 1, 2008, and December 31, 2010, at US trauma centers participating in the National Trauma Data
237 enced domestic violence and who presented to trauma centers participating in the National Trauma Data
240 d outcomes for children treated at pediatric trauma centers (PTCs) compared with those treated at adu
242 ovides the first international comparison of trauma center QI programs and demonstrates broad impleme
245 th 1 or more previous admissions to an urban trauma center (recidivists) were identified and compared
247 h a decline in transfers directly to level I trauma centers [risk ratio (RR) = 0.91; 95% confidence i
249 r of minimally injured patients to a level I trauma center (secondary overtriage) can cause inefficie
250 the trauma intensive care unit at a level 1 trauma center serving 4 states were enrolled and followe
254 ma system should offer patients triaged to a trauma center (TC) a survival advantage and cost-effecti
255 ma patients who were treated at a designated trauma center (TC) in Pennsylvania during the period 199
257 gnificantly lower when care is provided in a trauma center than in a non-trauma center and argue for
258 al mortality rate was significantly lower at trauma centers than at non-trauma centers (7.6 percent v
261 luated at San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center (the highest number at any of the receivin
262 h US for blunt abdominal trauma at a level 1 trauma center, the 3,679 patients with negative US findi
263 uspected blunt abdominal trauma at a level 1 trauma center, the authors retrospectively identified 3,
264 greater among patients treated in designated trauma centers, these patients were substantially in wor
265 ed blood cells (PRBCs) has led many civilian trauma centers to adopt this resource intensive strategy
266 4, 2011, among 1213 patients at 8 US level 1 trauma centers to investigate effects of citicoline vs p
267 major trauma admitted to level I or level II trauma centers, transport by helicopter compared with gr
270 ical directors and program managers from 330 trauma centers verified by professional trauma organizat
275 Data were derived from 252 US level I and II trauma centers voluntarily participating in the American
278 computed tomography) presenting to a level I trauma center was analyzed for patient demographics, inj
279 d emergency department visitors in a level I trauma center was placed in paired BACTEC Plus and BacT/
280 sport of patients with TBI to level I and II trauma centers was associated with improved survival, in
282 nine for brain injury at a public hospital's trauma center, we consulted three sets of community repr
283 the trauma intensive care unit of a level I trauma center were enrolled in an observational study th
285 The trauma databases of two urban level 1 trauma centers were queried over a period of more than 5
287 451 subjects from a Los Angeles, California, trauma center who sustained a first-time gunshot injury
288 s study was conducted at an academic level 1 trauma center with adults 65 years of age and older admi
289 stulated that patients admitted to a level I trauma center with dog bites would have severe injuries
290 ata were used to calculate index LOS (LOS in trauma center with highest designation level) and were l
291 s) hospitalized at a level 1 urban Pediatric Trauma Center with MTBI were prospectively enrolled.
292 315 patients who were admitted to a level 1 trauma center with open extremity fractures from Septemb
293 lunt injured patients in shock arriving at a trauma center within 2 hours of injury were included fro
294 not they were transferred to a level I or II trauma center within 24 hours of presentation, and used
297 patients have access to a verified pediatric trauma center within an hour assuming ground and air tra
298 United States have access to a level 1 or 2 trauma center within an hour, and 71.5% of pediatric pat
299 een the L1TCs with IHCs (IHC-L1TC) (n=2) and trauma centers without IHCs (n=4) within the OPO's servi
300 iculty justifying the expense of maintaining trauma centers without strong evidence of their effectiv
WebLSDに未収録の専門用語(用法)は "新規対訳" から投稿できます。