Article Figures & Data
Tables
- Table 1
Patient demographics among the study groups
Level I Level II p Value Age (average±SD) 33.3±13.5 33±12.1 NS Mechanism of injury Motor vehicle accident 66% 64% NS Fall from height 10.3% 8% NS Penetrating 6% 4% NS Other 11% 15% NS Unknown/missing 6.7% 9% NS Associated injuries Other skeletal 61.3% 59.9% NS Abdominal 14.3% 15.9% NS Chest 24.4% 29.2% NS Head 19.3% 11.5% 0.18 ISS 9 46 50.5 NS 10–14 21.4 19.3 NS 16–24 11.1 12.8 NS 25–75 21.4 17.4 NS Associated comorbidities 18.5% 19% NS, not significant.
- Table 2
Fracture data and treatment modalities among the study groups
Level I (%) Level II (%) p Value Fracture classification (AO/OTA) 32-A(1–3) 39 48 NS 32-B/C 56 47 NS Bilateral femur 6 5 NS Hip involvement 12.7 7.9 NS Open fractures 25 37 NS Open reduction 24 21 NS Implant type Antegrade nail 78 73 NS Other (plate, retrograde nail, cephalomedullary nail) 17 22 NS Unknown 5 5 NS NS, not significant.
- Table 3
Length of stay, ICU stay, and discharge destinations among the study groups
LITC RTC N Percent N Percent Discharge Home 71 56.3 64 56.1 Rehabilitation 41 32.2 34 29.8 Other hospital 4 3.2 7 6.1 Death 9 7.1 4 3.5 ICU stay Yes 17 13.5 11 9.6 Length of stay More than 11 days 63 50.0 58 51.0 ICU, intensive care unit; ISS, Injury Severity Score; LITC, level I trauma center; RTC, regional trauma center.
- Table 4
ISS, surgical team, and associated injuries
LITC RTC N Percent N Percent ISS 9–14 30 35.3 30 39.5 +16 33 80.3 28 73.7 Senior surgeon Attending 35 54.7 45 52.9 Non-attending* 23 41.8 8 36.4 Associated injuries Skeletal 50 65.8 44 63.8 Non-orthopedic** 71 56.8 33 67.3 *p<0.05, **p<0.001.
ISS, Injury Severity Score; LITC, level I trauma center; RTC, regional trauma center.
Outcome of femoral fractures care as a measure of trauma care between level I and level II trauma systems in Israel
Respond to this article