Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Apr;50(2):405-416.
doi: 10.1007/s00068-023-02282-0. Epub 2023 May 30.

Maturation of trauma systems in Europe

Samantha Scharringa  1 , Suzan Dijkink  2   3 , Pieta Krijnen  2   4 , Inger B Schipper  2   4
Affiliations

Maturation of trauma systems in Europe

Samantha Scharringa et al. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2024 Apr.

Abstract

Purpose: To provide an overview of trauma system maturation in Europe.

Methods: Maturation was assessed using a self-evaluation survey on prehospital care, facility-based trauma care, education/training, and quality assurance (scoring range 3-9 for each topic), and key infrastructure elements (scoring range 7-14) that was sent to 117 surgeons involved in trauma, orthopedics, and emergency surgery, from 24 European countries. Average scores per topic were summed to create a total score on a scale from 19 to 50 per country. Scores were compared between countries and between geographical regions, and correlations between scores on different sections were assessed.

Results: The response rate was 95%. On the scale ranging from 19 to 50, the mean (SD, range) European trauma system maturity score was 38.5 (5.6, 28.2-48.0). Prehospital care had the highest mean score of 8.2 (0.5, 6.9-9.0); quality assurance scored the lowest 5.9 (1.7, 3.2-8.5). Facility-based trauma care was valued 6.9 (1.4, 4.1-9.0), education and training 7.0 (1.2, 5.2-9.0), and key infrastructure elements 10.3 (1.6, 7.6-13.5). All aspects of trauma care maturation were strongly correlated (r > 0.6) except prehospital care. End scores of Northern countries scored significantly better than Southern countries (p = 0.03).

Conclusion: The level of development of trauma care systems in Europe varies greatly. Substantial improvements in trauma systems in several European countries are still to be made, especially regarding quality assurance and key infrastructure elements, such as implementation of a lead agency to oversee the trauma system, and funding for growth, innovation and research.

Keywords: Development; Europe; Maturation; Trauma; Trauma centers; Trauma systems.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Survey end scores per country. The bars represent the mean end scores ± standard deviation of the countries within each geographical region
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Pearson’s correlation coefficient matrix for the separate parts of the questionnaire
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hoff WS, Schwab CW. Trauma system development in North America. Clin Orthop. 2004;422:17–22. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000128292.43913.83. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Leppäniemi A. A survey on trauma systems and education in Europe. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2008;34(6):577–581. doi: 10.1007/s00068-008-7157-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dijkink S, Nederpelt CJ, Krijnen P, Velmahos GC, Schipper IB. Trauma systems around the world: a systematic overview. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017;83(5):917–925. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000001633. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Petridou ETh, Kyllekidis S, Jeffrey S, Chishti P, Dessypris N, Stone DH. Unintentional injury mortality in the European Union: How many more lives could be saved? Scand J Public Health. 2007;35(3):278–287. doi: 10.1080/14034940600996662. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mock C, Joshipura M, Arreola-Risa C, Quansah R. An estimate of the number of lives that could be saved through improvements in trauma care globally. World J Surg. 2012;36(5):959–963. doi: 10.1007/s00268-012-1459-6. - DOI - PubMed