Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund
Bei der Behandlung von Schockraumpatienten müssen in komplexen Situationen laufend und unter Zeitdruck zahlreiche kritische Entscheidungen getroffen werden. Auch erfahrene Teams machen hierbei häufig Fehler. Computerassistierte Entscheidungshilfen können basierend auf kontinuierlich eingespielten Informationen über den Zustand des Patienten anhand errechneter Wahrscheinlichkeiten weitere Behandlungsschritte vorschlagen. Die vorliegende Übersichtsarbeit fasst den aktuellen Stand der Literatur zur computerassistierten Entscheidungsfindung beim Traumapatienten zusammen.
Fragestellung
Literaturübersicht zu den vorhandenen Konzepten und Anwendungen der computerassistierten Entscheidungsfindung beim Traumapatienten.
Methodik
Narrativer Übersichtsartikel basierend auf einer Recherche der relevanten deutsch- und englischsprachigen Literatur der letzten 10 Jahre.
Ergebnisse
Es sind bereits einige gut funktionierende computerassistierte Entscheidungshilfen im Bereich der Traumaversorgung implementiert. Diverse Studien konnten zeigen, dass computerbasierte Entscheidungen im präklinischen Setting, im Schockraum und auf der traumatologischen Intensivstation das Behandlungsergebnis verbessern können. Zur weiteren Validierung und Implementierung müssen informationstechnische Barrieren behoben, die existierenden Systeme an die Datenschutzgesetze angeglichen und multizentrische Studien zur größeren Datenerhebung generiert werden.
Schlussfolgerung
Computerassistierte Entscheidungshilfen können helfen, die Versorgung von Traumapatienten zu verbessern. Für eine flächendeckende Anwendung müssen jedoch zuvor technische und legislative Barrieren überwunden werden.
Abstract
Background
In the management of trauma patients in the resuscitation room many time-pressured and critical decisions must continuously be made in complex situations. Even experienced teams frequently make errors in this context. Computer-assisted decision-making systems can predict critical situations based on patient data continuously acquired online. Based on the calculated predictions these systems can suggest the next steps in managing the patient. This review summarizes the current literature on computer-assisted decision-making in the management of trauma patients.
Objective
A literature review summarizing existing concepts and applications of computer-assisted decision-making support for the management of trauma patients.
Methods
Narrative review article based on an analysis of literature in the German and English languages from the last 10 years.
Results
There exist numerous computer-assisted decision-making systems in the field of trauma care. Several studies could show that computer-assisted decision-making can improve the outcome in the preclinical setting, the resuscitation room and in the intensive care unit. For further validation and implementation of these systems, information technological barriers have to be overcome, existing systems need to be adapted to current data protection regulations and large multicenter studies are necessary.
Conclusion
Computer-assisted decision-making can help to improve the management of trauma patients; however, before a ubiquitous implementation a number of technological and legislative barriers have to be overcome.
Literatur
Anazodo AN, Murthi SB, Frank MK, Hu PF, Hartsky L, Imle PC, Stephens CT, Menaker J, Miller C, Dinardo T, Pasley J, Mackenzie CF (2015) Assessing trauma care provider judgement in the prediction of need for life-saving interventions. Injury 46(5):791–797
Arkes HR, Shaffer VA, Medow MA (2007) Patients derogate physicians who use a computer-assisted diagnostic aid. Med Decis Making 27(2):189–202
Beda A, Carvalho AR, Carvalho NC, Hammermüller S, Amato MBP, Muders T, Gittel C, Noreikat K, Wrigge H, Reske AW (2017) Mapping regional differences of local pressure-volume curves with electrical impedance Tomography. Crit Care Med 45(4):679–686
Berchialla P, Gangemi EN, Foltran F, Haxhiaj A, Buja A, Lazzarato F, Stella M, Gregori D (2014) Predicting severity of pathological scarring due to burn injuries. A clinical decision making tool using Bayesian networks. Int Wound J 11(3):246–252
Bibault J‑E, Giraud P, Durdux C, Taieb J, Berger A, Coriat R, Chaussade S, Dousset B, Nordlinger B, Burgun A (2018) Deep Learning and radiomics predict complete response after neo-adjuvant chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer. Sci Rep 8(1):12611
Burke JP, Pestotnik SL (1999) Antibiotic use and microbial resistance in intensive care units. Impact of computer-assisted decision support. J Chemother 11(6):530–535
Carron P‑N, Taffe P, Ribordy V, Schoettker P, Fishman D, Yersin B (2011) Accuracy of prehospital triage of trauma patients by emergency physicians. A retrospective study in western Switzerland. Eur J Emerg Med 18(2):86–93
Chen L, McKenna TM, Reisner AT, Gribok A, Reifman J (2008) Decision tool for the early diagnosis of trauma patient hypovolemia. J Biomed Inform 41(3):469–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2007.12.002
Clarke JR, Webber BL, Gertner A, Kaye J, Rymon R (1994) On-line decision support for emergency trauma management. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care 1994:1028
Clarke JR, Spejewski B, Gertner AS, Webber BL, Hayward CZ, Santora TA, Wagner DK, Baker CC, Champion HR, Fabian TC, Lewis FR, Moore EE, Weigelt JA, Eastman AB, Blank-Reid C (2000) An objective analysis of process errors in trauma resuscitations. Acad Emerg Med 7(11):1303–1310
Clarke JR, Hayward CZ, Santora TA, Wagner DK, Webber BL (2002) Computer-generated trauma management plans. Comparison with actual care. World J Surg 26(5):536–538
Convertino VA, Moulton SL, Grudic GZ, Rickards CA, Hinojosa-Laborde C, Gerhardt RT, Blackbourne LH, Ryan KL (2011) Use of advanced machine-learning techniques for noninvasive monitoring of hemorrhage. J Trauma 71(1 Suppl):S25–S32
Dami F, Golay C, Pasquier M, Fuchs V, Carron P‑N, Hugli O (2015) Prehospital triage accuracy in a criteria based dispatch centre. BMC Emerg Med 15:32
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie (2017) S3-Leitlinie Polytrauma/Schwerverletzten-Versorgung
Fitzgerald M, Cameron P, Mackenzie C, Farrow N, Scicluna P, Gocentas R, Bystrzycki A, Lee G, O’Reilly G, Andrianopoulos N, Dziukas L, Cooper DJ, Silvers A, Mori A, Murray A, Smith S, Xiao Y, Stub D, McDermott FT, Rosenfeld JV (2011) Trauma resuscitation errors and computer-assisted decision support. Arch Surg 146(2):218–225
Fritz J, Gaissmaier C, Volkmann R, Höntzsch D, Greschner H (1999) Rechnergestützte Leistungsdokumentation. Auswirkungen in Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie auf Budget und Entgeltformen. Unfallchirurg 102(2):92–97
Mackenzie CF, Hu P, Sen A, Dutton R, Seebode S, Floccare D, Scalea T (2008) Automatic pre-hospital vital signs waveform and trend data capture fills quality management, triage and outcome prediction gaps. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2008:318–322
Mina MJ, Winkler AM, Dente CJ (2013) Let technology do the work. Improving prediction of massive transfusion with the aid of a smartphone application. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 75(4):669–675
Nachtigall I, Tafelski S, Deja M, Halle E, Grebe MC, Tamarkin A, Rothbart A, Uhrig A, Meyer E, Musial-Bright L, Wernecke KD, Spies C (2014) Long-term effect of computer-assisted decision support for antibiotic treatment in critically ill patients. A prospective ‘before/after’ cohort study. BMJ Open 4(12):e5370
Navarro S, Montmany S, Rebasa P, Colilles C, Pallisera A (2014) Impact of ATLS training on preventable and potentially preventable deaths. World J Surg 38(9):2273–2278
Ogunyemi OI, Clarke JR, Ash N, Webber BL (2002) Combining geometric and probabilistic reasoning for computer-based penetrating-trauma assessment. J Am Med Inform Assoc 9(3):273–282
Osterhoff G (2017) Nurse gender and its influence on emergency department triage-upsides and downsides of registry data. Pain 158(3):367–368
Rughani AI, Dumont TM, Lu Z, Bongard J, Horgan MA, Penar PL, Tranmer BI (2010) Use of an artificial neural network to predict head injury outcome. J Neurosurg 113(3):585–590
Salinas J, Chung KK, Mann EA, Cancio LC, Kramer GC, Serio-Melvin ML, Renz EM, Wade CE, Wolf SE (2011) Computerized decision support system improves fluid resuscitation following severe burns. An original study. Crit Care Med 39(9):2031–2038
Schuurman N, Leight M, Berube M (2008) A web-based graphical user interface for evidence-based decision making for health care allocations in rural areas. Int J Health Geogr 7:49
Sintchenko V, Iredell JR, Gilbert GL, Coiera E (2005) Handheld computer-based decision support reduces patient length of stay and antibiotic prescribing in critical care. J Am Med Inform Assoc 12(4):398–402
Stengel D, Bauwens K, Walter M, Köpfer T, Ekkernkamp A (2004) Comparison of handheld computer-assisted and conventional paper chart documentation of medical records. A randomized, controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A(3):553–560
Walkinshaw E (2011) iPhone app an aid in diagnosing concussions. CMAJ 183(14):E1047–E1048
Weng SF, Reps J, Kai J, Garibaldi JM, Qureshi N (2017) Can machine-learning improve cardiovascular risk prediction using routine clinical data? PLoS ONE 12(4):e174944
Wong KH, Lob S‑C, Lin C‑F, Lasser B, Mun SK (2009) Imaging components for a robotic casualty evaluation system. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2009.5334416
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Interessenkonflikt
G. Osterhoff, D. Pförringer, J. Scherer, C. Juhra, S. Maerdian und D.A. Back geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.
Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.
Additional information
Redaktion
W. Mutschler, München
H. Polzer, München
B. Ockert, München
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Osterhoff, G., Pförringer, D., Scherer, J. et al. Computerassistierte Entscheidungsfindung beim Traumapatienten. Unfallchirurg 123, 199–205 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-019-0676-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-019-0676-y