ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
A Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Optimal Patient-Centered Care
The nation's trauma care system, which includes trauma center hospitals \& emergency departments, is where over 30 million Americans receive care after traumatic injuries each year. Injury victims are diverse patients who suffer from complications of the initial injury as well as from multiple complex medical \& mental health conditions. Currently, high-quality patient-centered care is not the standard of care throughout US trauma care systems. Injured trauma survivors treated in trauma care systems frequently receive fragmented care that is not coordinated across hospital, emergency department, outpatient, \& community settings. Post-injury care is frequently not individualized to integrate the patient's most pressing post-traumatic concerns \& preferences into medical decision making. The investigators, as a group of front-line trauma center providers, patients, researchers \& policy makers, have been working together for over a decade to integrate patient-centered care into US trauma care systems. The investigators began this work by asking groups of injured patients the key patient-centered question: "Of everything that has happened to you since your injury, what concerns you the most?" The investigators developed scientifically sound assessment tools that allowed us to follow patient concerns after injury hospitalization. In May of 2011, the investigators convened an American College of Surgeons' policy summit that addressed mental health \& patient-centered care integration across US trauma care systems. As part of this policy summit, patient members of our team presented their experiences of traumatic injury \& recovery. While giving injured patients a "voice" at the summit, these narratives did not move surgical policy makers to develop mandates or guidelines for patient-centered care. In contrast, presentations that included information from randomized comparative effectiveness trials \& standardized outcome assessments convinced surgical policy makers to d
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- AI-enabled forecasting of prehospital transfusion needs in patients with trauma: a multinational, registry-based, retrospective, machine learning development and validation study / Manuel Sigle, Matthias Boos, Tim Weiss, Mart van Iersel, Chinyere Nwafor-Okoli, Paul McBeth, Aisling McMahon, Patricia B. Maguire, Peter Rosenberger, Meinrad Gawaz, Pamela Hickey, Rohan Lall, Erin Bugbee, Sven Weisser, Andreas Gather, Alfred Grützner, Oliver Kamp, Christian Waydhas, Marcel Dudda, André Nohl, Nicolas Eibinger, Paul Puchwein, Saffet Özkaya, Christian Knop, Martin Breitkopf, Kai Oliver Jensen, Yannik Kalbas, Ferdinand C. Wagner, Benjamin Erdle, Robert Wunderlich#784000
- Personalized Blood Transfusion Protocol for Cardiac Patients#843641
- The Family Perspectives Project Pilot Trial#825936
- Impact of Implementing a National Classification of Surgical Emergencies on Postoperative Morbidity and Mortality: a Prospective Multicenter Observational Study After Implementation.#1045906
- The Canadian COVID-19 Prospective Cohort Study#829504
Record · ID 811985
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive