Summary
The panel discussion focused on the roles of trauma centers, including treatment for orthopedic trauma.
From the viewpoint of acute care surgeons, "the staff of critical care centers should include orthopedic surgeons or emergency physicians whose subspecialty is orthopedics from the stage of life-saving treatment. On the other hand, orthopedic trauma surgeons consider that "critical care should be provided by emergency physicians, and the role that should be fulfilled by orthopedic surgeons is to enhance functional recovery" .
Since the ultimate goal is to establish a medical system that covers both "critical care" and "functional outcome" , this point should be reconfirmed. "Critical care" and "functional outcome" must be recognized as "two resources" , rather than "conflicting axes" . Trauma patients should be treated by teams of "surgeons specializing in trauma" responsible for "critical care" and orthopedic trauma surgeons in charge of "functional recovery" , instead of simple collaboration among different clinical departments.
Now that helicoptors and ambulances on-boarding physicians are available across Japan, trauma patients can be centralized to specific facilities. This suggests that the case volume makes no difference. Only facilities with superior treatment outcomes qualify as trauma centers. From the viewpoint of orthopedic surgery as well, it is significant to assemble fracture patients to specific facilities for treatment provided by orthopedic trauma surgeons.
Physicians can be clearly divided into those who are "interested in trauma and diseases" , and physicians "interested in diseases" will never become interested in trauma. The idea that these two types of physician can cooperate with each other is overly optimistic. It is necessary to establish optimal trauma centers that recruit a number of physicians "interested in trauma" to provide high-level treatment to increase life and functional recovery.
View full abstract