Login
Site Search
Trauma-List Subscription
Modify Your Subscription
Home >
List Archives
Surgery vs EM articles and professionals
Ronald Gross Rgross at harthosp.orgSun Apr 23 12:20:30 BST 2006
- Previous message: article in the may issue of "Annals of Emergency Medicine"
- Next message: Witnessed Paeds Resus - your views
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Thank you, Ken. You took the time to write down what we have discussed in the past. And what I agree with completely. It is not a job, in is not a profession - medicine and surgery is a call. Trauma surgery is just one aspect of that calling that some of us are passionate about, and like all of our colleagues (one would hope, anyway) all that we want to do is the best trhat can be done with what we have at our imediate disposal for the 10-15% of those injured patients that are going to need the highest level of care available. I will shut up now. >>> KMATTOX at aol.com 04/22 10:59 AM >>> First: Are there surgeons who are completely uncomfortable and inadequate in treating trauma patients? Are there cardiologist who are technically extremely adept? Are there paramedics who can intubate even the most difficult airway? Are there surgeons who can read an EKG? Are there emergency physicians who are a trauma surgeons dream as an associate and partner? Are there cardiologist who always misread an echocardiogram? Are there interventional radiologist who never take care of their hematoma and infectious complications? Are there trauma surgeons, neurosurgeons, and orthopedic surgeons who almost never come in to the hospital when called by an emergency physician, although they are getting paid to be on call? Are there emergency physicians who continue to use cyclic hyper resuscitation and are very very slow to call a surgeon even on a "bleeding to death" patient until they have satisfied their ego? Are there surgeons whose hands do not seem to be connected to their brain? The answer to these questions is a resounding YES. Second: The response to the articles in both system, management, EM, trauma, and surgical journals is that we should provide to any emergency patient the very best that we have available at any particular time. It is no secret that the majority of the trauma surgeons from the famous Denver General Hospital Trauma Service were away at the national meeting at the time of the Columbine School shootings a few years ago, and most of the in juried were taken to the areas non-level I trauma center. Third: In just what percent of the total trauma load of population catchment, does a trauma system, a trauma center, and a trauma surgeon make a difference. Depending on how you define effectiveness, it may be somewhere between 2% and 8%. Without question, most injured patients do not need a trauma center, trauma surgeon, and maybe not even a surgeon. I remember the days when emergency physicians reduced and splinted a Collies Fracture very well, and sent the patient on their way. Code I trauma (the minor injuries) in Houston are encouraged to be taken by ambulance or private car to NON-Level I emergency centers. It is the patient with a high injury severity score, altered physiology, and need for immediate surgery or surgical intensive care that benefits from the trauma system. Only 6-8% of a catchments trauma patients are hypotensive and 1/3 of these hypotensive patients have fatal and irreversible non-survivable injuries. In another 1/3 of the patients their hypotension is due to NON-blood loss causes, such as pneumothorax, a stomach full of air, drugs, etc. A trauma surgeons presence is not going to have ANY impact on outcome in this 2/3 of post traumatic hypotensive patients. It is in the other 1/3 (2-3% of the total trauma load) that the trauma surgeon can and does make a significant difference because of their availability, presence, technical skill, decision making, discipline, and down stream effects. FInally: For the post traumatic hypotensive patient with a survivable injury, the purpose of the emergency center and the emergency physician is to wave to the patient as they go from the ambulance dock to the ICU, interventional suite, or operating room. There is very little that needs or can be done to alter outcome, except increase the time, increase the cyclic crystalloid hyper resuscitation, increase the complications, increase the mortality by treatment in the emergency center. It is in these cases that the acute care surgeons presence is essential, and the trauma system is at its best. Can other specialist in health care be essential parts of this team, led by evidence based principles. Of course they can and do. Can an ill informed surgeon harm patients in this group with immediate life threatening injuries. Of course they can, by not being available, by popping the clot, by activating cytokines, by temporizing definitive therapy, by over treating, etc. etc. I still take Acute Care Surgery (formerly known as Trauma) in-hospital call several times a month. And I am much older than Dr. Gross. Do I make a difference when I am on call. I tend to think that I do, for the kind of patient I have identified who needs to not stay in the EC for unnecessary tests, or to document by innumerable CT scans, what is already known by physical exam or simple tests, most of which can be performed in the OR or ICU. Are there a list of Acute Care Surgery conditions which every emergency physician, intensivist, and surgeon in the world would agree need urgent and rapid surgical mentality and technical intervention. Of course such a list can and has been constructed. Remember that being a surgeon is not just a technical, non-cognitive feat. Being a surgeon is a philosophy of life, an approach to problem solving, which on occasion involves an operation. In today's world many emergency physicians, intervenional pulmonologists, cardiologist, gastroenteriologists, interventional radiologists and others are "surgeons" from a psychomotor standpoint. Likewise there are "surgeons" who are almost afraid to make a decision or appear afraid to operate on the big bad acute care surgical case and from a psychomotor standpoint are more like the internist of the 1950s. This is not a criticism of career choice, it is just recognizing that the cognitive proceduralists of today function in numerous venues of the hospital. Yes, each of us can find one or two articles which fluff our specialty ego, but it is the standardized system approach to major health problems and challenges ( such as disasters, evacuations, bird flu, trauma, cancer, clean air, immunizations, vascular disease, futility, medical economics, etc) the require for us to collectively apply our judgement, energies, and discipline. To do otherwise converts us from a professional guild to simple governmental employed tradesmen and tradeswomen. Let us together preserve the guild. Kenneth L. Mattox, M.D. -- trauma-list : TRAUMA.ORG To change your settings or unsubscribe visit: http://www.trauma.org/traumalist.html
- Previous message: article in the may issue of "Annals of Emergency Medicine"
- Next message: Witnessed Paeds Resus - your views
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the trauma-list mailing list
