PURPOSE: Although there are significant differences between China and the United States (US) in trauma medical services, there has been no direct comparative research on the epidemiological data of trauma centers between the 2 countries. This study aims to fill this research gap by directly comparing trauma centers in China and the US, providing valuable data and insights for the development of trauma centers in both countries, promoting academic exchange and cooperation internationally, and enhancing the level of global trauma medical care. METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective descriptive study. Data were collected for trauma patients with an injury severity score ≥16 treated from September 2013 to September 2019 at 2 hospital trauma centers in these 2 countries. Detailed clinical data (including injury mechanism, age, injury site, injury severity score, pre-hospital transport time, whether blood transfusion was performed, whether resuscitative thoracotomy was conducted, hospital and intensive care unit stay duration, the number of organ donor patients, mortality rates, and costs) were meticulously compiled and retrospectively analyzed to identify differences between the 2 trauma centers. The comparison was conducted using SPSS 23 software. Continuous variables are reported as median (Q₁, Q₃), and Mann Whitney U test is used to compare the median of continuous variables. Use clinically relevant critical points to classify continuous variables, with categorical variables represented as n (%), and comparisons were made between the 2 groups using the χ² test or Fisher's exact test. Statistical significance was defined as a 2-sided p < 0.05. RESULTS: These results point to significant differences in trauma center capacity, pre-hospital transport times, treatment procedures, hospital stay duration, mortality rates, and costs between the 2 centers. The volume of patients in trauma centers is less in China (2465 vs. 5288). Pre-hospital transport time was notably longer in China (180 min vs. 14 min), and the rate of emergency blood transfusions was lower in China (18.4% vs. 50.6%), Emergency thoracotomy was not performed in China but was conducted in 9.8% of cases in the US. Hospitalization costs were significantly lower in China than in the US ($5847 vs. $75,671). CONCLUSION There are clear differences in trauma center capacity (number of patients treated), pre-hospital transport time, age distribution of injured patients, injury mechanisms, injury sites, whether emergency thoracotomy is performed, hospital costs, and length of stay between the 2 trauma centers in China and America. Understanding these differences can help us further recognize the characteristics of Eastern and Western trauma patients.
Humans ; China/epidemiology* ; Trauma Centers/statistics & numerical data* ; Retrospective Studies ; United States/epidemiology* ; Male ; Female ; Wounds and Injuries/therapy* ; Middle Aged ; Adult ; Injury Severity Score ; Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data* ; Treatment Outcome

Objective: Soon after two massive earthquakes in Kumamoto, Japan, on April 14 and 16, 2016, the Shirakawasuigen pharmacy located in the Minamiaso village received prescriptions for disaster medications. Since prescriptions for disaster medications are typically used at temporary emergency shelters, pharmacies usually do not receive requests for them. On checking the content of these prescriptions, we found numerous prescription errors and queries. This study aimed to assess issues with dispensing medications after disasters.Methods: We reviewed all disaster medication prescriptions received by the pharmacy from April 20 to May 28, 2016 and the medication histories of these patients. We confirmed each patient’s data and medical and medication histories. Furthermore, we classified disaster prescription errors and queries into five categories according to their content and summed them in each category.Results: We obtained patients’ medical and medication histories from 100 (77.5%) of the 129 prescriptions received. Of the 129 prescriptions, a total of 158 prescription errors and queries pertaining to 96 (74.4%) prescriptions were confirmed: 88 (55.7%) for unclear medication usage and dosages, 22 (13.9%) for incorrect medication names, 34 (21.5%) for pharmaceutical queries, 8 (5.1%) for exceeding fixed prescription days (within seven days), and 6 (3.8%) for other issues.Conclusion: Nearly 80% of the prescriptions for disaster medications had prescription errors and queries. Therefore, we evaluated that the prescription’s format and entry method can be improved. Furthermore, to ensure a smooth drug supply and to reduce prescription entry deficiencies and formal prescription queries, pharmacists need to effectively manage disaster prescriptions.