Journal List > Korean J Neurotrauma > v.8(1) > 1058879

Understandings and Key Elements of Trauma Data Bank System

Abstract

Understanding the components of a Trauma Data Bank System (TDBS) is important, whether one is to use registry data for research or administrative purposes by an institution or a nation. TDBS has been designed to serve a number of purposes, including quality of life improvement, injury prevention, clinical research, and policy development. This review describes the history of trauma registry in the world and key components of TDBS. A detailed review of english-language articles on trauma registry was performed using MEDLINE searches. In addition, relevant articles from non-indexed journals were identified with Google Scholar. Since their beginning over 30 years ago, trauma registries have not fully been established in most developing countries. The following elements play key roles in the creation of trauma data bank: 1) study design, 2) inclusion and exclusion criteria, 3) collected variables, 4) registry software, 5) registry staff and training, and 6) data management strategies. By reviews in the articles, guidelines for the design and implementation of trauma registries are given. The final goal of this review is to make an application to establishment the futures of Korean Trauma Data Bank System.

REFERENCES

1). Brain Trauma Foundation; American Association of Neurological Surgeons; C; Congress of Neurological Surgeons. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury. JNeurotrauma24 Suppl1: S1-S106. 2007.
2). Centers for Disease Control (CDC). National survey of trauma registries—United States, 1987. MMWRMorbMortalWklyRep. 38:857–859. 1989.
3). Badjatia N., Carney N., Crocco TJ., Fallat ME., Hennes HM., Jagoda AS, et al. Guidelines for prehospital management of traumatic brain injury. 2nd edition.PrehospEmergCare12Suppl1: S1-S52;2008.
4). Baker SP., O'Neill B., Haddon W Jr., Long WB. The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care. JTrauma. 14:187–196. 1974.
5). Bergeron E., Lavoie A., Moore L., Bamvita JM., Ratte S., Clas D. Paying the price of excluding patients from a trauma registry. JTrauma. 60:300–304. 2006.
crossref
6). Bernardo LM., Gardner MJ., Seibel K. Playground injuries in children: a review and Pennsylvania Trauma Center experience. JSoc PediatrNurs. 6:11–620. 2001.
crossref
7). Boyd DR., Lowe RJ., Sheaff LC., Hoecker C., Rappaport DM. A profile of the trauma registry. JTrauma. 13:316–320. 1973.
crossref
8). Boyd DR., Rappaport DM., Marbarger JP., Baker RJ., Nyhus LM. Computerized trauma registry: a new method for categorizing physical injuries. AerospMed. 42:607–615. 1971.
9). Cameron PA., Gabbe BJ., McNeil JJ. The importance of quality of survival as an outcome measure for an integrated trauma system. Injury. 37:1178–1184. 2006.
crossref
10). Cameron PA., Gabbe BJ., McNeil JJ., Finch CF., Smith KL., Cooper DJ, et al. The trauma registry as a statewide quality improvement tool. JTrauma. 59:1469–1476. 2005.
crossref
11). Brain Trauma Foundation; American Association of Neurological Surgeons; Congress of Neurological Surgeons; J; Joint Section on Neurotrauma and Critical Care, AANS/CNS, Carney NA. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury. Methods. JNeurotrauma24Suppl1: S3-S6. 2007.
12). Croce MA., Zarzaur BL., Magnotti LJ., Fabian TC. Impact of motorcycle helmets and state laws on society's burden: a national study. AnnSurg. 250:390–394. 2009.
crossref
13). Faul M., Wald MM., Rutland-Brown W., Sullivent EE., Sattin RW. Using a cost-benefit analysis to estimate outcomes of a clinical treatment guideline: testing the Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines for the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury. JTrauma. 63:1271–1278. 2007.
crossref
14). Gabbe BJ., Cameron PA., Wolfe R. TRISS: does it get better than this? AcadEmergMed. 11:181–186. 2004.
crossref
15). Gillott AR., Thomas JM., Forrester C. Development of a statewide trauma registry. JTrauma. 29:1667–1672. 1989.
crossref
16). Gupta M. Improved health or improved decision making? The ethical goals of EBM. JEvalClinPract. 17:957–963. 2011.
crossref
17). Haider AH., Saleem T., Leow JJ., Villegas CV., Kisat M., Schneider EB, et al. Influence of the National Trauma Data Bank on the Study of Trauma Outcomes: Is It Time to Set Research Best Practices to Further Enhance Its Impact? JAmCollSurg, 2012 [Epub ahead of print].
18). Hemmila MR., Jakubus JL., Wahl WL., Arbabi S., Henderson WG., Khuri SF, et al. Detecting the blind spot: complications in the trauma registry and trauma quality improvement. Surgery. 142:439–448. discussion 448-449. 2007.
crossref
19). Hlaing T., Hollister L., Aaland M. Trauma registry data validation: Essential for quality trauma care. JTrauma. 61:1400–1407. 200.
crossref
20). Jurkovich GJ., Mock C. Systematic review of trauma system effectiveness based on registry comparisons. JTrauma47: S46-S55. 1999.
crossref
21). Kobusingye OC., Guwatudde D., Owor G., Lett RR. Citywide trauma experience in Kampala, Uganda: a call for intervention. Inj Prev. 8:133–136. 2002.
crossref
22). Lefering R., Paffrath T., Linker R., Bouillon B., Neugebauer EA. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie/German Society for Trauma Surgery. Head injury and outcome—what influence do concomitant injuries have? JTrauma. 65:1036–1043. discussion 1043-1044. 2008.
crossref
23). Li J., Jiang JY. Chinese Head Trauma Data Bank: effect of hyperthermia on the outcome of acute head trauma patients. JNeuro-trauma. 29:96–100. 2012.
crossref
24). Maejima S., Katayama Y. Neurosurgical trauma in Japan. WorldJ Surg. 25:1205–1209. 2001.
crossref
25). Marshall LF., Becker DP., Bowers SA., Cayard C., Eisenberg H., Gross CR, et al. The National Traumatic Coma Data Bank. Part 1: Design, purpose, goals, and results. JNeurosurg. 59:276–284. 1983.
26). Minter RM., Angelos P., Coimbra R., Dale P., de Vera ME., Hardacre J, et al. Ethical management of conflict of interest: proposed standards for academic surgical societies. JAmCollSurg. 213:677–682. 2011.
crossref
27). Moore L., Clark DE. The value of trauma registries. Injury. 39:686–695. 200.
crossref
28). Nakamura N., Yamaura A., Shigemori M., Ogawa T., Tokutomi T., Ono J, et al. Final report of the Japan Neurotrauma Data Bank project 1998-2001: 1,002 cases of traumatic brain injury. Neurol MedChir(Tokyo)46: 567-574. 2006.
crossref
29). Nathens AB., Jurkovich GJ., MacKenzie EJ., Rivara FP. A resource-based assessment of trauma care in the United States. JTrauma. 56:173–178. discussion 178. 2004.
crossref
30). Nwomeh BC., Lowell W., Kable R., Haley K., Ameh EA. History and development of trauma registry: lessons from developed to developing countries. WorldJEmergSurg1: 32. 2006.
31). Ogawa T. Japan Neurotrauma Databank Committee. [Current clinical trends in brain trauma—Japan Neurotrauma Databank]. Brain Nerve. 62:13–24. 2010.
32). Payne SR., Waller JA. Trauma registry and trauma center biases in injury research. JTrauma. 29:424–429. 1989.
crossref
33). Report from the 1988 Trauma Registry Workshop, including recommendations for hospital-based trauma registries. JTrauma. 29:827–834. 1989.
34). Ringdal KG., Lossius HM. SCANTEM ad hoc group on Scandinavian MTOS and Trauma Registry. Feasibility of comparing core data from existing trauma registries in scandinavia. Reaching for a Scandinavian major trauma outcome study (MTOS). ScandJ Surg. 96:325–331. 2007.
crossref
35). Roozenbeek B., Chiu YL., Lingsma HF., Gerber LM., Steyerberg EW., Ghajar J, et al. Predicting 14-Day Mortality after Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: Application of the IMPACT Models in the Brain Trauma Foundation TBI-trac(®) New York State Database. JNeu-rotrauma, 2012 [Epub ahead of print].
36). Shah N. Ethical issues in biomedical research and publication. J ConservDent. 14:205–207. 2011.
crossref
37). Smith E. The limits of sharing: an ethical analysis of the arguments for and against the sharing of databases and material banks. Ac-countRes. 18:357–381. 2011.
crossref
38). Stacey DH., Doyle JF., Gutowski KA. Safety device use affects the incidence patterns of facial trauma in motor vehicle collisions: an analysis of the National Trauma Database from 2000 to 2004. Plast ReconstrSurg. 121:2057–2064. 2008.
crossref
39). Sutrop M. Changing ethical frameworks: from individual rights to the common good? CambQHealthcEthics. 20:533–545. 2011.
crossref
40). The Lancet. Ethical behaviour in clinical research—a lesson from the past. Lancet378: 962. 2011.
41). Zafar H., Rehmani R., Raja AJ., Ali A., Ahmed M. Registry based trauma outcome: perspective of a developing country. Emerg MedJ. 19:391–394. 2002.
crossref
42). Zehtabchi S., Nishijima DK., McKay MP., Mann NC. Trauma registries: history, logistics, limitations, and contributions to emergency medicine research. AcadEmergMed. 18:637–643. 2011.
crossref

FIGURE 1.
The distribution of published studies using Trauma Data Bank Systems. American data was extracted from Haider, et al.18) and Japanese data from Ogawa, et al.32)
kjn-8-1f1.tif
FIGURE 2.
Permission form of database utilization in Korean Trauma Data Bank System.
kjn-8-1f2.tif
TABLE 1.
Data designs for each national trauma data bank systems in the literature
Nation Project name No. of hospital Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria Reference (published year)
China CHTDB 47 Acute head trauma GCS 3-15 None Li J and Jiang JY (2012)
Denmark Odense 3 ISS>15 Major multiple trauma Lofthus CM, et al. (2005)
Japan JNTDB Project 1998 10 Severe head injury GCS<8 at admission Underwent craniotomy Age<5 Nakamura N, et al. (2006)
Norway NNTR 2 ISS>10 Penetrating head injury Chronic SDH 2nd admission 24 hrs>injury Ringdal KG, et al. (2007)
Sweden KVITTRA 2 ISS>9 Chronic SDH Holder Y, et al. (2001)
USA NTCDB Pilot study 6 Severe head injury GCS<8 at admission Deterioration<48 hrs Gunshot wounds to head Marshall LF, et al. (1983)

CHTDB: Chinese Head Trauma Data Bank, GCS: Glasgow Coma Scale, ISS: Injury Severity Score, JNTDB: Japanese Neurotrauma Data Bank, NNTR: Norwegian National Trauma Registry, KVITTRA: Swedish trauma registry standard, SDH: subdural hematoma, NTCDB: National Traumatic Coma Data Bank

TABLE 2.
Common data variables and data items from International Trauma Data Bank Systems
Common data variables Common data items
General information/ Age
Demographics Sex Date of trauma
Injury mechanism Injury type
Pre-hospital care Intubation at scene Resuscitation (by doctor/ trainee)
Transport Date of ED arrival Transportation (methods/time interval)
Hospital care/ED Vital signs/GCS score In-hospital intubation Radiologic data (CT/MRI) Surgical methods
On-going care/ICU Total number of ICU stays
Outcomes GOS at discharge Deaths (Date/causes)
Scoring AIS In-hospital GCS score

ED: emergency department, ICU: intensive care unit, AIS: Abbreviated Injury Score, GCS: Glasgow Coma Scale, GOS: Glasgow Outcome Score

TOOLS
Similar articles