Effect of trauma quality improvement initiatives on outcomes and costs at community hospitals: A scoping review.

Background: Due to complex geography and resource constraints, trauma patients are often initially transported to community or rural facilities rather than a larger Level I or II trauma center. The objective of this scoping review was to synthesize evidence on interventions that improved the quality of trauma care and/or reduced healthcare costs at non-Level I or II facilities.

Methods: A scoping review was performed to identify studies implementing a Quality Improvement (QI) initiative at a non-major trauma center (i.e., non-Level I or II trauma center [or equivalent]). We searched 3 electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL) and the grey literature (relevant networks, organizations/associations). Methodological quality was evaluated using NIH and JBI study quality assessment tools. Studies were included if they evaluated the effect of implementing a trauma care QI initiative on one or more of the following: 1) trauma outcomes (mortality, morbidity); 2) system outcomes (e.g., length of stay [LOS], transfer times, provider factors); 3) provider knowledge or perception; or 4) healthcare costs. Pediatric trauma, pre-hospital and tele-trauma specific studies were excluded.

Results: Of 1046 data sources screened, 36 were included for full review (29 journal articles, 7 abstracts/posters without full text). Educational initiatives including the Rural Trauma Team Development Course and the Advanced Trauma Life Support course were the most common QI interventions investigated. Study outcomes included process metrics such as transfer time to tertiary care and hospital LOS, along with measures of provider perception and knowledge. Improvement in mortality was reported in a single study evaluating the impact of establishing a dedicated trauma service at a community hospital.

Conclusions: Our review captured a broad spectrum of trauma QI projects implemented at non-major trauma centers. Educational interventions did result in process outcome improvements and high rates of self-reported improvements in trauma care. Given the heterogeneous capabilities of community and rural hospitals, there is no panacea for trauma QI at these facilities. Future research should focus on patient outcomes like mortality and morbidity, and locally relevant initiatives.