Optimizing trauma system design: The GEOS (Geospatial Evaluation of Systems of Trauma Care) approach

BACKGROUND Trauma systems have been shown to reduce death and disability from injury but must be appropriately configured. A systematic approach to trauma system design can help maximize geospatial effectiveness and reassure stakeholders that the best configuration has been chosen. METHODS This article describes the GEOS [Geospatial Evaluation of Systems of Trauma Care] methodology, a mathematical modeling of a population-based data set, which aims to derive geospatially optimized trauma system configurations for a geographically defined setting. GEOS considers a region’s spatial injury profile and the available resources and uses a combination of travel time analysis and multiobjective optimization. The methodology is described in general and with regard to its application to our case study of Scotland. RESULTS The primary outcome will be trauma system configuration. CONCLUSION GEOS will contribute to the design of a trauma system for Scotland. The methodology is flexible and inherently transferable to other settings and could also be used to provide assurance that the configuration of existing trauma systems is fit for purpose.

[1]  Daniel O Scharfstein,et al.  The value of trauma center care. , 2010, The Journal of trauma.

[2]  Marion K Campbell,et al.  The GEOS study: designing a geospatially optimised trauma system for Scotland. , 2014, The surgeon : journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland.

[3]  T. Parke,et al.  Scottish urban versus rural trauma outcome study. , 2005, The Journal of trauma.

[4]  D. Trunkey.  Guidelines for Essential Trauma Care , 2005, World Journal of Surgery.

[5]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[6]  J. Jansen.  Regionalisation of trauma services in England & Wales: implications for Scotland. , 2010, The surgeon : journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland.

[7]  E. Mackenzie,et al.  A trauma resource allocation model for ambulances and hospitals. , 2000, Health services research.

[8]  E. Mackenzie,et al.  Relationship between trauma center volume and outcomes. , 2001, JAMA.

[9]  W. Sacco,et al.  Institution and per-surgeon volume versus survival outcome in Pennsylvania's trauma centers. , 1995, American journal of surgery.

[10]  Shahram Lotfipour,et al.  Guidelines for Field Triage of Injured Patients , 2013, The western journal of emergency medicine.

[11]  Jean A. Orman,et al.  Rural and urban distribution of trauma incidents in Scotland , 2013, The British journal of surgery.

[12]  D. Coyle,et al.  An economic evaluation of trauma care in a Canadian lead trauma hospital. , 1999, The Journal of trauma.

[13]  Randolph B. Tarrier,et al.  Groups , 1973, Algebra.

[14]  Etienne E. Pracht,et al.  Evaluation of a Mature Trauma System , 2006, Annals of surgery.

[15]  E. Mackenzie,et al.  The impact of trauma-center care on functional outcomes following major lower-limb trauma. , 2008, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[16]  Lawrence H Brown,et al.  Guidelines for Field Triage of Injured Patients: Recommendations of the National Expert Panel on Field Triage , 2009, Pediatrics.

[17]  Daniel O Scharfstein,et al.  A national evaluation of the effect of trauma-center care on mortality. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  Grad Dip Biostat,et al.  Improved Functional Outcomes for Major Trauma Patients in a Regionalized, Inclusive Trauma System , 2012, Annals of surgery.

[19]  M. Schiowitz,et al.  The impact of volume on outcome in seriously injured trauma patients: two years' experience of the Chicago trauma system. , 1991, The Journal of trauma.

[20]  Charles ReVelle,et al.  An iterative switching heuristic to locate hospitals and helicopters , 2001 .