Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Trauma quality improvement using risk-adjusted outcomes.

Shahid Shafi1, Avery B Nathens, Jennifer Parks

  • 1Department of Surgery, Division of Burns, Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, Dallas, Texas, USA. shahid.shafi@utsouthwestern.edu

The Journal of Trauma
|March 12, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Essential considerations in the use of improvised tourniquet: An editorial on "An American College of Surgeons Committee on trauma stop the bleed guideline on the use of improvised tourniquets for trauma patients with life-threatening extremity hemorrhage 2025".

The journal of trauma and acute care surgery·2026
Same author

The Impact of Trauma Center Care on One-Year Outcomes Among Injured Older Adults: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

Annals of surgery·2026
Same author

Timing of thromboprophylaxis in acute spinal cord injury patients: a TQIP study in 15,960 patients.

The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society·2026
Same author

A new pediatric trauma center quality benchmarking metric: Center-level variability in postinjury functional impairment using the Functional Status Scale (FSS).

The journal of trauma and acute care surgery·2026
Same author

Author Response: Days at Home After Traumatic Brain Injury: Moving Beyond Mortality to Evaluate Patient-Centered Outcomes Using Population Health Data.

Neurology·2026
Same author

The need for long-term support: Five-year outcomes after severe injury in older adults.

Injury·2026
Same journal

Article.

The Journal of trauma·2014
Same journal

Article.

The Journal of trauma·2014
Same journal

Program schedule for the sixty-fifth annual meeting of the american association for the surgery of trauma.

The Journal of trauma·2014
Same journal

Letters to the editor.

The Journal of trauma·2014
Same journal

Posttraumatic brachial plexitis.

The Journal of trauma·2011
Same journal

Incidental findings in focused assessment with sonography for trauma in hemodynamically stable blunt trauma patients: speaking about cost to benefit.

The Journal of trauma·2011
See all related articles

Trauma center verification by the American College of Surgeons (ACS) doesn't guarantee optimal patient outcomes. Significant outcome variations exist among similar ACS-verified trauma centers, highlighting areas for quality improvement.

Area of Science:

  • Trauma Surgery
  • Healthcare Quality Improvement
  • Surgical Outcomes Research

Background:

  • The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) tracks risk-adjusted surgical outcomes.
  • The American College of Surgeons (ACS) trauma center verification focuses on resource availability, not patient outcomes.
  • Hypothesis: Significant outcome variations exist among similar ACS-verified trauma centers despite comparable resources.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate variations in patient outcomes among American College of Surgeons (ACS)-verified Level I trauma centers.
  • To determine if ACS verification, focused on resources, correlates with consistent patient survival rates.
  • To identify high-performing and low-performing trauma centers based on risk-adjusted survival.

Main Methods:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Utilized the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) for adult patients (16-99 years) from 58 ACS-verified Level I trauma centers (264,102 patients).
  • Employed multivariate logistic regression to calculate expected survival, adjusting for patient demographics, injury mechanism, transfer status, and severity.
  • Calculated Observed-to-Expected (O/E) survival ratios to categorize centers as high, low, or average performers.

Main Results:

  • Nearly half of the ACS-verified Level I trauma centers demonstrated significantly different outcomes than expected based on risk adjustment.
  • Fourteen centers were identified as high performers (significantly better outcomes).
  • Eleven centers were identified as low performers (significantly worse outcomes), while 33 were average performers.

Conclusions:

  • Current American College of Surgeons (ACS) trauma center verification may not ensure consistent optimal patient outcomes.
  • Significant opportunities exist for improving trauma care quality by adopting practices from high-performing centers.
  • Further validation is recommended to refine trauma center quality assessment and improvement strategies.