Cited by 101Trauma and Emergency Care StudiesTrauma Management and DiagnosisEmergency and Acute Care Studies

Severity-adjusted mortality in trauma patients transported by police

Open access
Band, Roger A., Salhi, Rama A., Holena, Daniel N., Powell, Elizabeth, Branas, Charles C., Carr, Brendan G.·2014·Annals of Emergency Medicine

Abstract

Study objective Two decades ago, Philadelphia began allowing police transport of patients with penetrating trauma. We conduct a large, multiyear, citywide analysis of this policy. We examine the association between mode of out-of-hospital transport (police department versus emergency medical services [EMS]) and mortality among patients with penetrating trauma in Philadelphia.Methods This is a retrospective cohort study of trauma registry data. Patients who sustained any proximal penetrating trauma and presented to any Level I or II trauma center in Philadelphia between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2007, were included. Analyses were conducted with logistic regression models and were adjusted for injury severity with the Trauma and Injury Severity Score and for case mix with a modified Charlson index.Results Four thousand one hundred twenty-two subjects were identified. Overall mortality was 27.4%. In unadjusted analyses, patients transported by police were more likely to die than patients transported by ambulance (29.8% versus 26.5%; OR 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00 to 1.39). In adjusted models, no significant difference was observed in overall mortality between the police department and EMS groups (odds ratio [OR] 0.78; 95% CI 0.61 to 1.01). In subgroup analysis, patients with severe injury (Injury Severity Score >15) (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.90), patients with gunshot wounds (OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.94), and patients with stab wounds (OR 0.19; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.45) were more likely to survive if transported by police.Conclusion We found no significant overall difference in adjusted mortality between patients transported by the police department compared with EMS but found increased adjusted survival among 3 key subgroups of patients transported by police. This practice may augment traditional care.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.11.008

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Analyses of police deadly force restricted to fatality-only data may produce results statistically biased by factors that influence mortality.

    “Any analysis of police deadly force restricted to data that only include fatalities may produce results that are statistically biased by factors that influence mortality, such as whether bullets strike vital organs [12], whether police officers administer first aid or engage in “scoop and run” practices [15, 16], and whether an adult trauma care center is nearby [17, 18].”

    From Factors associated with police shooting mortality: A focus on race and a plea for more comprehensive data (2021) · cites this paper as [15]

    The Study Design and Setting section describes a police policy of transporting penetrating-trauma patients without waiting for paramedics and says that, in the authors’ experience, police provide no care during transport. The Discussion considers how rapid transport and field interventions might affect survival. The paper does not analyze fatality-only police-deadly-force data or establish the statistical bias asserted in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Band, R. A., Salhi, R. A., Holena, D. N., Powell, E., Branas, C. C., & Carr, B. G.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Band, Roger A.
Venue
Annals of Emergency Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-05
Volume
63
Issue
5
Pages
608-614.e3
ISSN
0196-0644 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1991754929
Cited by
101
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3
FWCI
6.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Emergency Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Pennsylvania
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (R01CE001615)
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (K08HS017960)
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA016187)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K12HL109009)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Trauma Management and Diagnosis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
Keywords
police transport, penetrating trauma, trauma mortality, emergency medical services, gunshot wounds, stab wounds, injury severity, trauma registry, Philadelphia
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Retrospective Studies, Transportation of Patients, Trauma Centers, Wounds, Gunshot, Wounds, Penetrating, Wounds, Stab, Philadelphia, Injury Severity Score, Police

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review