Stevan J. Jordan; Roozbeh Shafafy; Amelia E. Davidson; Christopher J. To; Kathryn Gill; Matthew C. Solan
Volume 7, Issue 2 , April 2019, , Pages 162-168
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the incidence of trampoline park injuries (TPIs) at a local recreational facility and to quantify the burden on emergency and orthopaedic services at our institute.Methods: All patients that presented to the Emergency Department (ED) from the trampoline park via ambulance from ...
Read More
Objective: To investigate the incidence of trampoline park injuries (TPIs) at a local recreational facility and to quantify the burden on emergency and orthopaedic services at our institute.Methods: All patients that presented to the Emergency Department (ED) from the trampoline park via ambulance from July 2014 to November 2015 were included in the study. Patients’ medical records were reviewed for clinical details including date, location and type of injury, treatment received, length of stay and outpatient follow-up. A cost analysis was performed to estimate the financial impact of each injury.Results: A total of 71 patients were included in the study, with a mean age of 20 (7-48). Soft tissue sprains (n=29, 41%) and fractures (n=25, 35%) were the most common injuries, with the majority occurring in the lower limb. Two patients sustained open tibial fractures necessitating transfer to level 1 trauma centres. Fourteen patients (20%) underwent surgery, predominantly requiring open reduction and internal fixation. Overall, 18 patients (25%) required admission to hospital with mean length of stay of 2 days. The cost for pre-hospital, emergency and in-patient care amounted to over £80,000.Conclusion: TPIs pose a significant financial cost for local orthopaedic and emergency services. Contrary to studies evaluating home trampoline injuries, the majority of fractures at trampoline parks occurred in the lower limbs. Improved injury prevention strategies are required to help reduce morbidity and lower the financial implications for local NHS trusts.
Pallavi Sarji Uthkarsh; Gopalkrishna Gururaj; Sai Sabharish Reddy; Mandya Siddalingaiah Rajanna
Volume 4, Issue 2 , April 2016, , Pages 93-100
Abstract
Objective: To assess the availability of trauma care services in a district referral hospital of Southern India.Methods: This was a cross-sectional study being performed during 2013 in a tertiary healthcare centre in Southern Indian. A detailed assessment of trauma care services was done in a 400 bed ...
Read More
Objective: To assess the availability of trauma care services in a district referral hospital of Southern India.Methods: This was a cross-sectional study being performed during 2013 in a tertiary healthcare centre in Southern Indian. A detailed assessment of trauma care services was done in a 400 bed speciality hospital which is an apex referral hospital in the public health system using a check list based on WHO guidelines for evaluation of essential trauma care services, along with in-depth interviews of hospital stake holders and key informants.Results: The hospital had physical infrastructure in terms of emergency room, inpatient wards, operation theatres, intensive care unit and blood bank facilities. The recently constructed designated building for trauma care services was not operational and existing facilities were used beyond capacity. A designated trauma team was lacking and speciality services for managing polytrauma were deficient and thus, existing personnel were performing multiple tasks. Neurosurgeons and rehabilitative nursing staff were unavailable, and a radiographer was not available on a 24/7 basis. Existing nursing personnel had not received any formal training in trauma care and standard operating protocols were not available for trauma care. Resources for acute resuscitation were partially adequate. The hospital lacked adequate resources to manage head, abdomen, chest and spine injuries, and most of the polytrauma cases were referred to nearby city hospitals.Conclusion: District hospital, the only referral hospital in public health system for trauma victims of that region, had inadequate resources to manage trauma victims, which was probably responsible for delay in trauma care, improper referrals, high cost of care and poor outcomes.
