Efficacy evaluation of China trauma care training program
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1001-8050.2019.12.013
- VernacularTitle: 中国创伤救治培训课程培训效果评价
- Author:
Yongan XU
1
;
Mao ZHANG
1
;
Xiaogang ZHAO
1
;
Zhanfei LI
2
;
Xiangjun BAI
2
;
Lianyang ZHANG
3
Author Information
1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital Zhejiang University School of Medicine & Institute of Emergency Medicine Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310009, China
2. Department of Traumatic Surgery, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
3. Trauma Center, State Key Laboratory of Trauma, Burns and Combined Injury, Daping Hospital of Army Medical University, Chongqing 400042, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Wounds and injuries;
Questionaires;
Trauma treatment training
- From:
Chinese Journal of Trauma
2019;35(12):1130-1137
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To understand the current situation of trauma treatment and evaluate the training effect and influencing factors of "China Trauma Care Training (CTCT)" by investigating the trainees who participated in the course.
Methods:A total of 1660 trainees who participated in CTCT training from May 2017 to May 2018 were selected as the subjects of this study. Through questionnaires, the general information (gender, occupation, professional title, discipline source, length of time engaged in trauma treatment), the situation of trauma treatment in their hospitals (hospital level, trauma treatment mode, number of severe trauma cases each year), the recommended model of trauma treatment, learning methods of trauma treatment knowledge, and the trauma training interval were obtained. The trainees took tests before and after the training, and the test results were used to evaluate the training effect and analyze the influencing factors.
Results:(1) There were 1 230 males (74.10%), 1 356 physicians (81.93%), 1 247 with intermediate title or lower levels (75.12%), 756 from emergency department/emergency surgery (45.54%), and 899 who were engaged in trauma treatment for more than five years (54.16%). (2) There were 1 068 trainees from tertiary hospitals (64.34%). The main mode of severe trauma treatment in hospitals was "emergency+ consultation+ triage" (1 198 trainees, 72.17%). A total of 1014 trainees treated less than 200 severe trauma patients each year (61.08%). A total of 1210 trainees recommended emergency/emergency surgery (72.89%) and 350 trainees recommended trauma surgery/trauma hospital (21.08%) as the main mode of treatment. (3) There were various approaches to acquire trauma treatment knowledge, including 1 029 person-times (61.99%) through department internal guidelines, 924 person-times (55.66%) through case discussion, 879 person-times (52.95%) through self-teaching, 767 person-times (46.20%) through lectures, 382 person-times (23.01%) through trauma courses and 285 person-times through further studies at home and abroad (17.17%). A total of 951 trainees recommended 1-2 years as the training interval (57.3%). (4) The average test score before training was (67.5±14.5)points, which were influenced by the hospital level, discipline source, title of trainees, length of time engaged in trauma treatment, and amount of severe trauma cases each year in their hospitals. The hospital level and discipline source were the main effect factors. (5) The average test score after training was (83.8±11.6)points, which was significantly higher than that before training (P<0.01), and the scores of trainees in different subgroups were all improved. The main factors influencing the test score included hospital level, number of severe trauma cases each year, discipline source, professional title, number of severe trauma cases each year treated in the hospital. The major effect factor was the amount of severe trauma cases each year.
Conclusions:The main mode of trauma treatment in hospitals involved in this study is "multi-disciplinary consultation+ decentralized treatment" . Few trainees have received systematic trauma treatment training, and their trauma treatment knowledge level and the test scores before training is influenced by hospital level, the case number of severe trauma treatment, discipline source, and trainees’qualifications. After the standardized and standardized trauma treatment training course "CTCT" , the scores of students from different backgrounds have been significantly improved, and the gap between students has been significantly narrowed.
