Trauma care capacity and performance in Texas: Regional comparisons

Objective. The study reviewed one year of Texas hospital discharge data and Trauma Registry data for the 22 trauma services regions in Texas to identify regional variations in capacity, process of care and clinical outcomes for trauma patients, and analyze the statistical associations among capacity, process of care, and outcomes. ^ Methods. Cross sectional study design covering one year of state-wide Texas data. Indicators of trauma capacity, trauma care processes, and clinical outcomes were defined and data were collected on each indicator. Descriptive analyses were conducted of regional variations in trauma capacity, process of care, and clinical outcomes at all trauma centers, at Level I and II trauma centers and at Level III and IV trauma centers. Multilevel regression models were performed to test the relations among trauma capacity, process of care, and outcome measures at all trauma centers, at Level I and II trauma centers and at Level III and IV trauma centers while controlling for confounders such as age, gender, race/ethnicity, injury severity, level of trauma centers and urbanization. ^ Results. Significant regional variation was found among the 22 trauma services regions across Texas in trauma capacity, process of care, and clinical outcomes. The regional trauma bed rate, the average staffed bed per 100,000 varied significantly by trauma service region. Pre-hospital trauma care processes were significantly variable by region---EMS time, transfer time, and triage. Clinical outcomes including mortality, hospital and intensive care unit length of stay, and hospital charges also varied significantly by region. In multilevel regression analysis, the average trauma bed rate was significantly related to trauma care processes including ambulance delivery time, transfer time, and triage after controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, injury severity, level of trauma centers, and urbanization at all trauma centers. Transfer time only among processes of care was significant with the average trauma bed rate by region at Level III and IV. Also trauma mortality only among outcomes measures was significantly associated with the average trauma bed rate by region at all trauma centers. Hospital charges only among outcomes measures were statistically related to trauma bed rate at Level I and II trauma centers. The effect of confounders on processes and outcomes such as age, gender, race/ethnicity, injury severity, and urbanization was found significantly variable by level of trauma centers. ^ Conclusions. Regional variation in trauma capacity, process, and outcomes in Texas was extensive. Trauma capacity, age, gender, race/ethnicity, injury severity, level of trauma centers and urbanization were significantly associated with trauma process and clinical outcomes depending on level of trauma centers. ^ Key words: regionalized trauma systems, trauma capacity, pre-hospital trauma care, process, trauma outcomes, trauma performance, evaluation measures, regional variations ^

The Hospital Study of the City of Houston and Harris County

In 1941 the Texas Legislature appropriated $500,000 to the Board of Regents of the University of Texas to establish a cancer research hospital. The M. D. Anderson Foundation offered to match the appropriation with a grant of an equal sum and to provide a permanent site in Houston. In August, 1942 the Board of Regent of the University and the Trustees of the Foundation signed an agreement to embark on this project. This institution was to be the first one in the medical center, which was incorporated in October, 1945. The Board of Trustees of the Texas Medical Center commissioned a hospital survey to: - Define the needed hospital facilities in the area - Outline an integrated program to meet these needs - Define the facilities to be constructed - Prepare general recommendations for efficient progress The Hospital Study included information about population, hospitals, and other health care and education facilities in Houston and Harris County at that time. It included projected health care needs for future populations, education needs, and facility needs. It also included detailed information on needs for chronic illnesses, a school of public health, and nursing education. This study provides valuable information about the general population and the state of medicine in Houston and Harris County in the 1940s. It gives a unique perspective on the anticipated future as civic leaders looked forward in building the city and region. This document is critical to an understanding of the Texas Medical Center, Houston and medicine as they are today. SECTIONS INCLUDE: Abstract The Abstract was a summary of the 400 page document including general information about the survey area, community medical assets, and current and projected medical needs which the Texas Medical Center should meet. The 123 recommendations were both general (e.g., 12. “That in future planning, the present auxiliary department of the larger hospitals be considered inadequate to carry an added teaching research program of any sizable scope.”) and specific (e.g., 22. That 14.3% of the total acute bed requirement be allotted for obstetric care, reflecting a bed requirement of 522 by 1950, increasing to 1,173 by 1970.”) Section I: Survey Area This section basically addressed the first objective of the survey: “define the needed hospital facilities in the area.” Based on the admission statistics of hospitals, Harris County was included in the survey, with the recognition that growth from out-lying regional areas could occur. Population characteristics and vital statistics were included, with future trends discussed. Each of the hospitals in the area and government and private health organizations, such as the City-County Welfare Board, were documented. Statistics on the facilities use and capacity were given. Eighteen recommendations and observations on the survey area were given. Section II: Community Program This section basically addressed the second objective of the survey: “outline an integrated program to meet these needs.” The information from the Survey Area section formed the basis of the plans for development of the Texas Medical Center. In this section, specific needs, such as what medical specialties were needed, the location and general organization of a medical center, and the academic aspects were outlined. Seventy-four recommendations for these plans were provided. Section III: The Texas Medical Center The third and fourth objectives are addressed. The specific facilities were listed and recommendations were made. Section IV: Special Studies: Chronic Illness The five leading causes of death (heart disease, cancer, “apoplexy”, nephritis, and tuberculosis) were identified and statistics for morbidity and mortality provided. Diagnostic, prevention and care needs were discussed. Recommendations on facilities and other solutions were made. Section IV: Special Studies: School of Public Health An overview of the state of schools of public health in the US was provided. Information on the direction and need of this special school was also provided. Recommendations on development and organization of the proposed school were made. Section IV: Special Studies: Needs and Education Facilities for Nurses Nursing education was connected with hospitals, but the changes to academic nursing programs were discussed. The needs for well-trained nurses in an expanded medical environment were anticipated to result in significant increased demands of these professionals. An overview of the current situation in the survey area and recommendations were provided. Appendix A Maps, tables and charts provide background and statistical information for the previous sections. Appendix B Detailed census data for specific areas of the survey area in the report were included. Sketches of each of the fifteen hospitals and five other health institutions showed historical information, accreditations, staff, available facilities (beds, x-ray, etc.), academic capabilities and financial information.