Scholarlink

Background <p>Since the 2018 decision of the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) inpatient emergency care in Germany has undergone a profound structural change. Although musculoskeletal injuries account for around 40–45% of the emergency department (ED) caseload, current regulations lack binding requirements for primary trauma/orthopedic surgical treatment. This raises questions regarding quality of care, legal certainty and postgraduate training.</p> Objective <p>This study investigated to what extent injured patients in German trauma centers receive primary care from physicians with trauma surgery qualifications and which structural consequences result from this.</p> Methods <p>In a&#xa0;nationwide online survey all 626 trauma centers listed in the German Society for Trauma Surgery (DGU) TraumaNetwork were contacted. Data were collected on ED structures, the qualifications of physicians involved in primary care and responsibilities for setting the indications for trauma/orthopedic surgery. In addition, a&#xa0;qualitative content analysis of voluntary free-text comments was performed.</p> Results <p>Responses from 225 trauma centers were analyzed (response rate 36%). The primary care of non-polytraumatized trauma/orthopedic surgery patients was provided predominantly by trauma surgery residents (53% local trauma centers, 56% regional trauma centers, 59% supraregional trauma centers). The on-site presence of board-certified trauma surgeons was lower (16–28%). In 78&#xa0;hospitals emergency physicians from other disciplines provided initial care in fewer than 10% of cases. The free-text comments emphasized deficits in quality of care and postgraduate training.</p> Discussion <p>The results demonstrate a&#xa0;relevant discrepancy between the epidemiological importance of trauma/orthopedic clinical conditions and their structural anchoring in the emergency department. The G‑BA requirements ensure organizational standards but do not guarantee specialty-specific depth. To ensure quality of care, legal certainty and postgraduate training, binding regulations for trauma/orthopedic surgical competence in the ED are necessary.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Wie viel Unfallchirurgie steckt in der Notaufnahme, und wie sichern wir die Qualität der Versorgung?

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月4日

查看全文
  • Wolfgang Lehmann,
  • Christine Höfer

摘要

Background

Since the 2018 decision of the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) inpatient emergency care in Germany has undergone a profound structural change. Although musculoskeletal injuries account for around 40–45% of the emergency department (ED) caseload, current regulations lack binding requirements for primary trauma/orthopedic surgical treatment. This raises questions regarding quality of care, legal certainty and postgraduate training.

Objective

This study investigated to what extent injured patients in German trauma centers receive primary care from physicians with trauma surgery qualifications and which structural consequences result from this.

Methods

In a nationwide online survey all 626 trauma centers listed in the German Society for Trauma Surgery (DGU) TraumaNetwork were contacted. Data were collected on ED structures, the qualifications of physicians involved in primary care and responsibilities for setting the indications for trauma/orthopedic surgery. In addition, a qualitative content analysis of voluntary free-text comments was performed.

Results

Responses from 225 trauma centers were analyzed (response rate 36%). The primary care of non-polytraumatized trauma/orthopedic surgery patients was provided predominantly by trauma surgery residents (53% local trauma centers, 56% regional trauma centers, 59% supraregional trauma centers). The on-site presence of board-certified trauma surgeons was lower (16–28%). In 78 hospitals emergency physicians from other disciplines provided initial care in fewer than 10% of cases. The free-text comments emphasized deficits in quality of care and postgraduate training.

Discussion

The results demonstrate a relevant discrepancy between the epidemiological importance of trauma/orthopedic clinical conditions and their structural anchoring in the emergency department. The G‑BA requirements ensure organizational standards but do not guarantee specialty-specific depth. To ensure quality of care, legal certainty and postgraduate training, binding regulations for trauma/orthopedic surgical competence in the ED are necessary.