996
Dear Editor, Re: Are Australian and New Zealand trauma service resources reflective of the Australasian Trauma Verification Model Resource Criteria? I read with interest the article titled ‘Are Australian and New Zealand trauma service resources reflective of the Australasian Trauma Verification Model Resource Criteria?’1 The article is a survey of trauma nurse coordinators (TNCs) with regard to their institutions’ human resourcing levels. The respondents are also asked about the need for additional resources. The article highlights the discrepancy between self-reported human resourcing levels and that endorsed by the Australasian Trauma Verification Program. Based on their clinician surveys, Leonard and Curtis advocate a review of the human resource component of the verification programme. The Institute of Medicine lists six core areas to improve quality in health care.2 These include health care that is safe, effective, timely, efficient, equitable and patient centred. We need the help of our patients to identify the deficiencies in our current trauma system. Gabbe and colleagues carried out a qualitative survey of trauma patients managed at two level 1 trauma centres in Victoria.3 The centres are either verified or have received consultative visits by the Trauma Verification Program. The highlight of this survey was that the majority of patients reported a positive experience with regard to their acute management within the trauma centres. Disappointingly, patients were
Letters to the Editor
highly critical of their care following discharge from hospital. Lack of post-discharge care coordination, communication and consistent point of contact were some of the issues raised by patients. A post-discharge care coordinator, who acts as an intermediary between the patient and the treating units, may be one solution. Trauma care is a continuum, helping the injured achieve their full recovery potential. Our trauma system and its verification process should reflect this. Human resource allocation needs to recognize the importance of providing continuing care and support to the patient following their discharge from the trauma centre.
References 1. Leonard E, Curtis K. Are Australian and New Zealand trauma service resources reflective of the Australasian Trauma Verification Model Resource Criteria? ANZ J. Surg. 2014; 84: 523–7. 2. Institute of Medicine (U.S.). Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001. 3. Gabbe BJ, Sleney JS, Gosling CM et al. Patient perspectives of care in a regionalised trauma system: lessons from the Victorian State Trauma System. Med. J. Aust. 2013; 198: 149–52.
Afshin Kamali Moaveni, MBChB, FRACS, FAOrthA Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia doi: 10.1111/ans.12883
© 2014 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons
Copyright of ANZ Journal of Surgery is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Dear Editor, Re: Are Australian and New Zealand trauma service resources reflective of the Australasian Trauma Verification Model Resource Criteria? I read with interest the article titled ‘Are Australian and New Zealand trauma service resources reflective of the Australasian Trauma Verification Model Resource Criteria?’1 The article is a survey of trauma nurse coordinators (TNCs) with regard to their institutions’ human resourcing levels. The respondents are also asked about the need for additional resources. The article highlights the discrepancy between self-reported human resourcing levels and that endorsed by the Australasian Trauma Verification Program. Based on their clinician surveys, Leonard and Curtis advocate a review of the human resource component of the verification programme. The Institute of Medicine lists six core areas to improve quality in health care.2 These include health care that is safe, effective, timely, efficient, equitable and patient centred. We need the help of our patients to identify the deficiencies in our current trauma system. Gabbe and colleagues carried out a qualitative survey of trauma patients managed at two level 1 trauma centres in Victoria.3 The centres are either verified or have received consultative visits by the Trauma Verification Program. The highlight of this survey was that the majority of patients reported a positive experience with regard to their acute management within the trauma centres. Disappointingly, patients were
Letters to the Editor
highly critical of their care following discharge from hospital. Lack of post-discharge care coordination, communication and consistent point of contact were some of the issues raised by patients. A post-discharge care coordinator, who acts as an intermediary between the patient and the treating units, may be one solution. Trauma care is a continuum, helping the injured achieve their full recovery potential. Our trauma system and its verification process should reflect this. Human resource allocation needs to recognize the importance of providing continuing care and support to the patient following their discharge from the trauma centre.
References 1. Leonard E, Curtis K. Are Australian and New Zealand trauma service resources reflective of the Australasian Trauma Verification Model Resource Criteria? ANZ J. Surg. 2014; 84: 523–7. 2. Institute of Medicine (U.S.). Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001. 3. Gabbe BJ, Sleney JS, Gosling CM et al. Patient perspectives of care in a regionalised trauma system: lessons from the Victorian State Trauma System. Med. J. Aust. 2013; 198: 149–52.
Afshin Kamali Moaveni, MBChB, FRACS, FAOrthA Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia doi: 10.1111/ans.12883
© 2014 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons
Copyright of ANZ Journal of Surgery is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
