Trauma systems: a global comparison

Traumatic injuries are a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, with 40 million people permanently injured and nearly 6 million deaths every year. Approximately 90% of trauma-related deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries, and 50% of trauma-related deaths are believed to be preventable. Although effective trauma systems encompassing prehospital, hospital, and rehabilitative care are critical for improving outcomes, global documentation remains limited. This study provides a comparative analysis of trauma care systems across 8 countries-the United States, Canada, Brazil, Belgium, the Netherlands, Australia, Japan, and South Africa-spanning 5 continents. Each country's analysis includes demographic context, system organization (including prehospital, hospital, and posthospital care), clinical and systemic outcomes, and future directions. Trauma systems across countries vary significantly in the structure and regulation of trauma care, injury patterns, national data collection, and accessibility, reflecting diverse demographics and healthcare infrastructures. National trauma registries are well established in countries like the Netherlands, Japan, and Canada but are in early development stages in Brazil, South Africa, and Belgium. In some countries, such as the Netherlands and Canada, trauma from traffic collisions and falls dominates, whereas others, such as Brazil and South Africa, have higher rates of violence-related injuries like homicides. Accessibility in remote areas remains a challenge in countries with large landmasses such as Canada and Australia, where rural populations often face limited or delayed trauma care. Other countries, such as the United States and South Africa, face different challenges linked to disparities in quality of and access to care between public and private systems. Although centralization of trauma care, standardization of national trauma care systems, and investment in workforce and infrastructure are universal goals for improving outcomes, solutions tailored to each country are required to optimize trauma systems globally.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
OTA International The Open Access Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Published
2025-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/oi9.0000000000000376
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
11.27
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Trauma systems: a global comparison

Taketo Kurozumi, Brian Bernstein, Douglas W. Lundy, Zsolt J. Balogh et al.
5 citations
OTA International The Open Access Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
11.27
article

Trauma systems: a global comparison

Taketo Kurozumi, Brian Bernstein, Douglas W. Lundy, Zsolt J. Balogh, Inger Birgitta Schipper, Katherine R. Miclau, Guy Putzeys, Marcos de Camargo Leonhardt, Guilherme Pelosini Gaiarsa, Hans‐Christoph Pape, Ross Leighton, Theodore Miclau, Kodi Edson Kojima, Wim Vandesande, Maria Adelaide Miranda Goncalves
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Traumatic injuries are a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, with 40 million people permanently injured and nearly 6 million deaths every year. Approximately 90% of trauma-related deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries, and 50% of trauma-related deaths are believed to be preventable. Although effective trauma systems encompassing prehospital, hospital, and rehabilitative care are critical for improving outcomes, global documentation remains limited. This study provides a comparative analysis of trauma care systems across 8 countries-the United States, Canada, Brazil, Belgium, the Netherlands, Australia, Japan, and South Africa-spanning 5 continents. Each country's analysis includes demographic context, system organization (including prehospital, hospital, and posthospital care), clinical and systemic outcomes, and future directions. Trauma systems across countries vary significantly in the structure and regulation of trauma care, injury patterns, national data collection, and accessibility, reflecting diverse demographics and healthcare infrastructures. National trauma registries are well established in countries like the Netherlands, Japan, and Canada but are in early development stages in Brazil, South Africa, and Belgium. In some countries, such as the Netherlands and Canada, trauma from traffic collisions and falls dominates, whereas others, such as Brazil and South Africa, have higher rates of violence-related injuries like homicides. Accessibility in remote areas remains a challenge in countries with large landmasses such as Canada and Australia, where rural populations often face limited or delayed trauma care. Other countries, such as the United States and South Africa, face different challenges linked to disparities in quality of and access to care between public and private systems. Although centralization of trauma care, standardization of national trauma care systems, and investment in workforce and infrastructure are universal goals for improving outcomes, solutions tailored to each country are required to optimize trauma systems globally.

OTA International The Open Access Journal of Orthopaedic TraumaVol. 8(3S)
St. Luke's University Health Network (US), San Francisco General Hospital (US), Dalhousie University (CA), University of Cape Town (ZA), University of California, San Francisco (US), Leiden University Medical Center (NL), AZ Groeninge (BE), John Hunter Hospital (AU), University Hospital of Zurich (CH), Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (BR), Teikyo University (JP), KU Leuven (BE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
11.27
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.