Trauma registries in developing countries: a review of the published experience.

BACKGROUND: The burden of injury is greatest in developing countries. Trauma systems have reduced mortality in developed countries and trauma registries are known to be integral to monitoring and improving trauma care. There are relatively few trauma registries in developing countries and no reviews describing the experience of each registry. The aim of this study was to examine the collective published experience of trauma registries in developing countries. METHODS: A structured review of the literature was performed. Relevant abstracts were identified by searching databases for all articles regarding a trauma registry in a developing country. A tool was used to abstract trauma registry details, including processes of data collection and analysis. RESULTS: There were 84 articles, 76 of which were sourced from 47 registries. The remaining eight articles were perspectives. Most were from Iran, followed by China, Jamaica, South Africa and Uganda. Only two registries used the Injury Severity Score (ISS) to define inclusion criteria. Most registries collected data on variables from all five variable groups (demographics, injury event, process of care, injury severity and outcome). Several registries collected data for less than a total of 20 variables. Only three registries measured disability using a score. The most commonly used scores of injury severity were the ISS, followed by Revised Trauma Score (RTS), Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) and the Kampala Trauma Score (KTS). CONCLUSION: Amongst the small number of trauma registries in developing countries, there is a large variation in processes. The implementation of trauma systems with trauma registries is feasible in under-resourced environments where they are desperately needed.

Evaluation of Trauma Care capabilities in four countries using the WHO-IATSIC Guidelines for Essential Trauma Care.

BACKGROUND: We sought to identify affordable and sustainable methods to strengthen trauma care capabilities globally, especially in developing countries, using the Guidelines for Essential Trauma Care. These guidelines were created by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Society of Surgery and provide recommendations on elements of trauma care that should be in place at the range of health facilities globally. METHODS: The guidelines were used as a basis for needs assessments in 4 countries selected to represent the world's range of geographic and economic conditions: Mexico (middle income; Latin America); Vietnam (low income; east Asia); India (low income; south Asia); and Ghana (low income; Africa). One hundred sites were assessed, including rural clinics (n=51), small hospitals (n=34), and large hospitals (n=15). Site visits utilized direct inspection and interviews with administrative and clinical staff. RESULTS: Resources were partly adequate or adequate at most large hospitals, but there were gaps that could be improved, especially in low-income settings, such as shortages of airway equipment, chest tubes, and trauma-related medications; and prolonged periods where critical equipment (e.g., X-ray, laboratory) were unavailable while awaiting repairs. Rural clinics everywhere had difficulties with basic supplies for resuscitation even though some received significant trauma volumes. In all settings, there was a dearth of administrative functions to assure quality trauma care, including trauma registries, trauma-related quality improvement programs, and regular in-service training. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified several low-cost ways in which to strengthen trauma care globally. It also has demonstrated the usefulness of the Guidelines for Essential Trauma Care in providing an internationally applicable, standardized template by which to assess trauma care capabilities.