Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 12, 2026

Pseudofracture: An Acute Peripheral Tissue Trauma Model
Published on: April 18, 2011
Trauma team activation for pediatric patients in Denmark: a multicenter study of criteria, organization, and injury
Christina Højfeldt Nordestgaard1,2, Martin Faurholdt Gude3,4, Sara Viskum Leth5
1Research Center for Emergency Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. chrnod@rm.dk.
Insights
Pediatric trauma team activation (TTA) in Denmark shows significant variation and high overtriage rates, indicating a mismatch with actual injury severity. Optimizing pediatric-specific triage criteria is crucial for consistent care and resource use.
Area of Science:
- Emergency Medicine
- Pediatric Surgery
- Trauma Surgery
Background:
- Pediatric trauma team activation (TTA) aims for timely care of severely injured children.
- Practices and criteria for TTA vary significantly across trauma systems.
- This study addresses variations in pediatric TTA criteria and outcomes in Danish trauma centers.
Purpose of the Study:
- To describe and compare pediatric TTA criteria and organizational models.
- To analyze injury severity across Danish level I trauma centers.
- To identify variations in prehospital and in-hospital TTA protocols.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective multicenter cohort study of pediatric trauma patients (<18 years) from 2014-2024.
- Analysis of center-specific TTA protocols via structured inquiries.
- Injury severity assessed using Injury Severity Score (ISS) and Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS); overtriage defined as ISS < 15.
Main Results:
- 3,452 pediatric trauma patients were included, with 14% having ISS ≥ 15.
- Two TTA models (single-criterion, point-based) and four organizational structures were identified.
- Overtriage rates ranged from 81% to 95%, highest in point-based TTA models; mortality was low.
Conclusions:
- Danish pediatric trauma triage exhibits significant inter-center variation and high overtriage.
- Current TTA practices appear misaligned with pediatric injury severity profiles.
- Aligning pediatric-specific triage criteria can improve accuracy, consistency, and resource utilization.
Background:
Pediatric trauma team activation (TTA) is intended to ensure timely management of severely injured children, yet both prehospital visitation practices and in-hospital TTA criteria vary across trauma systems. The aim of this study was to describe and compare pediatric TTA criteria, organizational models, and injury severity across all Danish level I trauma centers.
Methods:
We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study including all pediatric trauma patients (< 18 years) admitted via TTA at the four Danish level I trauma centers between 2014 and 2024. Center-specific prehospital and in-hospital TTA protocols were obtained through structured inquiries. Injury severity was assessed using Injury Severity Score (ISS) and Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). Overtriage was defined as TTA in patients with ISS < 15.
Results:
A total of 3,452 pediatric trauma patients were included. Two distinct TTA models (single-criterion and point-based) and four organizational structures were identified. Overall, 14% of patients had ISS ≥ 15, corresponding to high overtriage across all centers. Overtriage rates ranged from 81% to 95% and were highest at centers using point-based TTA models. Mortality was low and did not differ significantly between centers. Among the most severely injured patients (ISS ≥ 25), head and thoracic injuries predominated.
Conclusion:
Pediatric trauma triage in Denmark shows substantial inter-center variation combined with consistently high overtriage. These findings suggest a misalignment between current TTA practices and pediatric injury severity profiles. Greater alignment of pediatric-specific triage criteria across prehospital and in-hospital settings may support more accurate TTA, promote consistent care, and improve resource utilization across trauma centers.
Related Concept Videos
Traumatic Brain Injury l: Introduction
Flail Chest-II
Assessment:
1. Clinical Evaluation:
History:

