Communication in rural trauma medicine: a practice/art unto itself.
Avtgis, Theodore A. ; Polack, E. Phillips
The importance of efficient triage and treatment of trauma patients
have been evident since the Napoleonic Wars when Jean Larrey developed
the ambulance volantes (flying ambulance) as a means of reducing the
time interval from initial injury to treatment (Trunkey, 1983). The
'golden hour' for treatment of trauma patients was first
conceptualized by Cowley (1975) using French data obtained from the
treatment of soldiers during World War I (Santy, 1918). These data
suggest that patients treated within the first hour of injury have a
mortality rate of 10% versus a mortality rate of 75% if treatment
occurred within eight hours of injury. Therefore, the reduction in time
in the practice of trauma medicine is one of the most significant
factors in the ongoing education efforts to improve outcomes (continuous
quality improvement--CQI) for patients.
Waller, Curran, and Noyes (1964) reported that when treated within
the 'golden hour', 44% of rural trauma deaths were salvageable
compared with 36% of urban trauma deaths. Simply put, time loss is a
major contributor to trauma patient mortality and if it had not been for
the loss of time, chances of survival would have been significantly
increased. It was determined that rural fatalities resulted from less
severe injuries than those observed in urban settings. Delays in
accident reporting as well as extended transport times were identified
as contributing to preventable mortality of rural trauma patients
(Waller et al., 1964). Given the increased mortality rates associated
with rural trauma patients, investigating all of the factors
contributing to time delay becomes necessary in efforts to work toward
more efficient treatment and transport of trauma patients. Such factors
include the processes and procedures related to medical triage, the
level of coordination and collaboration among the trauma team, and the
extramural trauma network as a whole. In terms of the communicative and
psychological aspects of coordination and collaboration in trauma,
communication researchers have begun interdisciplanry collaboration to
investigate such processes and phenomena (see, for example, Avtgis,
Polack, Martin, & Rossi, in press). However, even in light of these
efforts, there are a myriad of research and education efforts that are
still in need to be developed. The current study traces a comprehensive
interdisciplinary effort to improve trauma care through the efficient
exchange of medical information in communicatively competent ways.
The National Academy of Science (1966) identified trauma as a major
health concern given its ubiquity and both socio-cultural and economic
impact on society. This public health concern was obvious to many of the
surgeons returning from the battlefields of Vietnam in that these
veteran surgeons have been major contributors to the advancement of
trauma system development throughout the United States and the world
(Eiseman, 1967). The need for coordination and control of triage and
trauma care are universal and thus the lessons learned in the jungles of
Vietnam are readily applicable to other trauma systems and environments.
Although the term trauma, whether occurring in urban or rural locations,
has been treated as functionally equivalent, research findings indicate
dramatic patient outcome differences existing between urban and rural
trauma regardless of the formalization of the organized state-wide
trauma system (Gonzales, Cummings, Mulekar, & Rodning, 2006).
Therefore, the two distinct arenas of the rural environment and the
urban environment in terms of trauma are truly unique from one another
and as such have communication practices that are contextually unique.
Therefore, efforts to improve care and process should be tailored toward
not only the commonalities of trauma patient treatment but also the
unique features of the environment within which the medicine is
practiced.
Differentiating Rural Trauma
The United States Bureau of the Census defines rural as an area
with an urban population of 50,000 or less and a population density not
exceeding 1000 people per square mile (Rogers, Shackford, Osler, Vane,
& Davis, 1999). The American College of Surgeons, Committee on
Trauma defines rural as "an area where geography, population
density, weather, distance or availability of professional or
institutional resources combine to isolate the trauma victim in an
environment where access to definitive care is limited" (Rogers et
al. 1999, p. 75). An estimated 65 million people live in rural regions
within the United States with the average age of rural residents being
older than their urban counterparts (Rural Task Force Report to the
Secretary, 2002). While approximately one-third of the American
population resides in a rural area, only 9% of the U.S. physicians
reside in these areas (Rural Trauma Committee of the American College of
Surgeons Committee on Trauma, 2006; Rogers, Osler, Turner, Shackford,
Camp, & Lesage, 1999). Therefore, this large doctor to patient ratio
serves as a significant hurdle to effective treatment making competent
and efficient communication among trauma team personnel that much more
important. Traumatic injury is the leading cause of death in the 1 to 44
age group and the third most common cause of death for all age groups.
Yet in comparing rural and urban trauma, rural residents are 50% more
likely to die from trauma than their urban peers (Esposito, Sanddal,
Hansen, & Reynolds, 1995; Peek-Asa, Zwerling & Stallones, 2004).
Motor vehicular crashes are the single greatest cause of mortality for
both urban and rural trauma victims, however more than half of these
fatal crashes occur in rural areas (Karsteadt, Larsen, & Farmer,
1994; Rogers, Shackford, et al., 1999). Given the population disparity
between urban and rural settings, the fact that half of motor vehicular
crashes occur in rural areas is alarming. This is of special concern
when combined with the greater mortality rate of rural trauma patients
as a whole.
The evidence reviewed thus far clearly indicates that given the
number of factors involved, the practice of surgery in rural areas is
quite different from that of urban surgery. It is in these differences
where communication training, if it is to be effective, needs to also be
uniquely tailored to the specific challenges faced by medical personnel.
Interdisciplinary Conceptualization
When analyzing practices and processes involved in the practice of
medicine and medical care, researchers and scholars tend to rely on
discipline-specific theories in which to develop approaches to improve
practice and patient safety (see, for example, Thompson, Dorsey, Miller,
& Parrott, 2003). The current study conceptualizes trauma care as an
organizational communication practice and as such, is conceptualized in
these terms. When considering the time dependent practice of trauma
medicine, we are referring to a practice that seeks maximum efficiency
among its members with the maximum reduction of possible impeding
factors. This efficient process is one of organization, not of medicine
in that trauma care involves coordination, logistics, as well as
technological and human synchrony to be effective (Avtgis et al., in
press).
Medicine, one of the most well-established hierarchies in the
world, is embedded in the concept of power, status, and privilege
differences (Starr, 1982). Given this, any application of theory needs
to account for such an embedded structure when developing approaches
targeted at greater efficiency (Polack, Avtgis, Rossi, & Shaffer, in
press). One such theory of organizational communication which considers
such embedded power differences is the Theory of Independent Mindedness
(TIM) (Infante, 1987a, 1987b). The TIM advocates congruity between the
culture created within a specific organization (i.e., the microculture)
and the larger culture (i.e., macroculture) within which it operates
(Infante, 1987b). The TIM has been shown to be an effective theory of
organizational productivity across cultures where power differences
exist and are readily acknowledged by societal members (Avtgis &
Rancer, 2007a). Within the practice of medicine, the power structure is
clear, the duties and responsibilities of the trauma team members can
shift based on the immediate needs of the specific situation. For
example, it is common for a patient to be sent to the nearest healthcare
facility for stabilization and triage. Once stabilized, the decision is
made as to whether or not the patient should be transferred. These
initial treatment facilities may not necessarily be equipped for
definitive trauma care or contain personnel adequately trained to
administer definitive care. Due to these factors, although power
differences are emphasized throughout traditional medical care, such
power differences become subordinate to the immediate needs of the
patient and the patient's survival. That is, basic life saving
roles need to be adequately filled by existing personnel regardless of
their status or "official" occupational duties. For example,
it is not uncommon in remote healthcare facilities for maintenance
workers to fill critical roles in efforts to stabilize the trauma
patient. Power and status in situations such as these serve as a
deterrent to effective patient care.
According to the TIM, personnel at all levels should be active
members in decision making as well as feel free to engage in a robust
exchange of information and debate with any member of the work team
(Avtgis & Rancer, 2007b). Therefore, developing communication
systems targeted at effective information exchange must include all
members of the organizational community, not only those who have the
requisite background and title for such practices (e.g., surgeon,
doctor, nurse). The nature of trauma medicine is one of chaos and sense
making. Therefore, power, status, and structure, which are effective
mechanisms in stable and static environments can become inhibitors in
chaotic environments where flexibility in roles and rules are common and
effective practice. The following sections describe the comprehensive
effort that was undertaken throughout the trauma network system in the
state of West Virginia to create communication curricula for trauma
medicine targeted at increasing patient survival and safety.
Phase One
Phase one of this effort consisted of identifying the specific
communication problems that exist throughout the state-wide trauma
network as well as the communication problems specific to each
individual trauma facility within the network. Twenty-four trauma
personnel at different levels in the authority structure were surveyed
to identify problematic communication. More specifically, six
physicians, eleven nurses, and seven trauma registrars (N = 24)
completed an open ended questionnaire responding to the following
questions about the trauma transfer process: a) What do you feel are the
biggest problems in the trauma transfer process? b) What are the biggest
problems associated with the incoming trauma transfer process? and c)
What are the problems associated with the outgoing trauma transfer
process?
Utilizing assertion analysis which provides the frequency with
which certain objects are characterized in certain ways (Stewart &
Shamdasani, 1990), results indicated that there were significant
concerns about interpersonal relationships between the lower level
trauma centers [Level III and Level IV trauma facilities which are
primarily concerned with the stabilization of the patient in preparation
for transfer to definitive care facilities] and the higher level trauma
centers [Level I and Level II which are facilities equipped to deliver
definitive care to the trauma patient]. More specifically, personnel at
Level III and Level IV trauma facilities reported being unappreciated
and condescended to by personnel at Level I and Level II facilities. On
the other hand, personnel from Level I and II trauma facilities reported
the inefficiency with which relevant information was relayed as well as
having too much extraneous information provided by personnel at Level
III and Level IV facilities. From these findings, it was determined that
communication competency training along with training in a hierarchical
standardization of trauma patient information be developed and
instituted system-wide in order to address the concerns of relational
and information exchange difficulties.
RTTDC Training. The Rural Trauma Team Development Course (RTTDC[c])
was developed by the Ad Hoc Rural Subcommittee of the Committee on
Trauma: American College of Surgeons to address the unique geographic
and demographic attributes as well as limited resources that are
constant barriers in rural trauma care. Several studies have evidenced
the delays and longer time periods involved in the pre-hospital phase of
a rural trauma when compared to an urban trauma of equal injury
(Champion, Augenstein, Cushing, et al., 1999; Gonzales et al., 2006;
Greer, Kispert, Lane, Lin, & Gupta, 2007). Additional delays were
also noted following the patient's arrival at the initial rural
trauma facility and transfer to a definitive care facility to combat
such delays and challenges (Champion et al., 1999; Kappel, Rossi,
Polack, Avtgis, & Martin, 2009).
The RTTDC[c] curriculum was designed to train/educate personnel in
trauma facilities in a team approach to the initial assessment and
resuscitation of the injured patient. The team approach requires a
reduction in the authority gradient so that role-taking in the practice
of trauma medicine can be assumed by any team member (Kappel et al.,
2009). The authority gradient refers to the embedded hierarchy and power
differences inherent in the medical profession. The RTTDC[c] optimally
advocates that the decision to transfer the injured patient to a
definitive care facility should be rendered within 15 minutes of patient
arrival to the facility. In an effort to standardize information
transfer, participants were trained in the acronym S.I.R. which
represents vital Signs, Injury to the patient, and the Response or
treatment that has been rendered to the patient. It is believed that by
creating such a concise framework through which information is
communicated, there will be a significant reduction in the noise or
extraneous information that is often experienced during the trauma
treatment process resulting in both inaccurate information and time
loss.
RTTDC[c]-Communication. The practices of competent communication by
healthcare professionals are an integral part of improving patient
safety (Polack et al., 2008). As has been mandated by professional
organizations such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS), the
Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO),
and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME),
the ability to effectively and appropriately communicate is inextricably
linked to patient safety and medical error reduction. According to
Infante, Rancer, and Avtgis (2010), competent communication is defined
as the ability to relay information in an effective and appropriate way.
Existing research indicates that competent communication results in the
reduction of medical error (Britten, Stevenson, Barry, Barber, &
Bradley, 2000), reduction in medical liability (Beckman, Markakis,
Suchman, & Frankel, 1994), improved patient adherence to treatment
regimens (Garrity, 1981), and increased satisfaction between patient and
physician (Bartlett, Grayson, Barker, Levine, Golden, & Libber,
1984).
One of the central aims of communication training is the
development of an affirming communicator style. Affirming communication
is communication that affirms or validates the experience of the person
with whom we are interacting while simultaneously contributing to a
relational climate that is less aggressive, more productive, more
accurate, and more pro-social (Avtgis & Chory, 2010; Infante, 1988;
Polack, Avtgis, Kappel, & Martin, 2010; Rancer, & Avtgis, 2006).
The assumption of increased effectiveness and appropriateness associated
with affirming communication is evidenced in several studies indicating
that affirming communicators or more apt to achieve their interactional
goals (Norton, 1983), more appropriate in conflict situations
(Jordan-Jackson, Lin, Rancer, & Infante, 2008), and used as a means
of improving coordination and logistics associated with the trauma
transfer process (Avtgis et al., in press). Therefore, affirming
communication is an integral part of communication training and can be
especially effective in an environment such as trauma medicine where
disorganization, chaos, and uncertainty are common factors.
The RTTDC[c]-Communication curriculum was based on the Berlo (1960)
source, message, channel, receiver model of communication (SMCR). This
basic model is one of the most popular ways to understand the human
communication process. Although some scholars have questioned the
accuracy of process or linear models of communication, the Berlo model
contains components that are easily recognizable and understandable by
people in other disciplines beside communication. As such, the SMCR
served as the basis for training in affirming communication. Given that
members of trauma teams have little time for the acquisition of
information, relaying only the most relevant and parsimonious
information is the central focus of communication competence training.
More specifically, the current curriculum adhered to the assumptions
that communication information to be used in the training will be new
and/or foreign to the trainees and therefore must be simplistic in
nature, the training content has to be delivered by a source or sources
who are credible within the field of trauma medicine as opposed to
credible in a social science such as Communication Studies. Based on the
limited time constraints and these two basic premises, three objectives
were derived. More specifically, to increase the participants'
knowledge of the basic elements and processes of human communication,
illustrate how engaging in affirming communication results in improved
teamwork (which includes reduction in power differences, reduction in
the authority gradient, and improved patient safety), and understanding
how the practice of affirming and competent communication has
system-wide benefits for all people involved in trauma medicine as well
as for the entire structure under which they work.
Phase Two
The second phase of this effort consisted of testing the RTTDC[c]
and RTTDC[c]-Communication curricula on trauma personnel knowledge
retention and a reduction on trauma patient transfer times.
Method
Participants
Both the RTTDC[c] and the RTTDC[c] Communication were administered
to members of the West Virginia State Trauma and Emergency Care System
(WVSTECS). WVSTECS is an all inclusive trauma system that is voluntary
in nature where member facilities agree to uphold particular standards
of care and procedures in exchange for being granted a $500,000 medical
liability cap. These standards include being periodically reviewed,
documenting performance, implementing improvement measures, and
maintaining quality standards as mandated by WVSTECS. These quality
standards are consistently monitored through a statewide trauma
registry.
The acute care facilities included in the study were designated in
accordance with the 2006 Resources for Optimal Care of the Injured
Patient of the American College of Surgeons, Committee on Trauma as
trauma receiving facilities. The 32 participating trauma facilities
included two Level I, four Level II, three Level III, and 23 Level IV
facilities. As indicated earlier, Level I and Level II facilities are
those trauma centers that are equipped with both technology and
personnel to provide definitive care to the critically injured trauma
patient with the lower Level III and Level IV facilities have a much
more limited capacity to provide definitive care and are primary
concerned with resuscitation and stabilization of the trauma patient.
Complete data were collected from 18 of the 32 facilities resulting
in a total sample of 308 trauma patients. One hundred seventeen patients
were processed through facilities whose personnel received the seven
hour RTTDC[c] training, 36 patients were processed through facilities
whose patients received the seven hour RTTDC[c] training and the one
hour RTTDC[c]-Communication training, and 191 patients were processed
through facilities whose personnel received neither the RTTDC[c] nor the
RTTDC[c]-Communication training (i.e., control group).
Procedures
This quasi-field experiment utilized a pre-test/posttest
non-equivalent groups design. All training was conducted at the
respective trauma facilities with the same group of instructors
administering the training to all participants. That is, the instructors
used in the study were well respected trauma surgeons known throughout
the entire statewide trauma network. For assessing the effectiveness of
the RTTDC[c] curriculum in terms of cognitive knowledge, a fifteen item
multiple choice test (possible score ranged from 0 correct to 15
correct) was administered at four times: a) pre-RTTDC[c] training; b)
immediate post RTTDC[c] training; c) three month post RTTDC[c] training;
and d) six month post RTTDC[c] training. Assessment of the
RTTDC[c]-Communication curriculum assessment consisted of a nine item
multiple choice measure (possible score range from 0 correct to 9
correct). Unlike the RTTDC[c] pre-test post-test assessment, the
RTTDC[c]-Communication assessment consisted of a post-test only
assessment. This type of assessment was utilized to reduce any
sensitization effect of the pre-test which has historically had adverse
effects on communication skills training (Avtgis, Rancer, & Madlock,
2010). The RTTDC[c]-Communication assessment was administered at three
different times: a) immediate post RTTDC[c]-Communication training; b)
three months post RTTDC[c]-Communication training; and c) six month post
RTTDC[c]-Communication training.
To assess the differences in trauma patient transfer times, two
traditional bottlenecks in the transfer process and a logistic variable
that are commonly associated with trauma transfer delays were identified
and used as measurement markers. More specifically, the time of trauma
patient arrival to the time of the decision to transfer the patient to
the definitive care facility, the time from decision to transfer the
trauma patient to the definitive care facility until the transport squad
arrives, and how many number of transporting squads (e.g., helicopter or
ambulance) were contacted until a successful transport could be arranged
and coordinated.
Results
Knowledge Assessment
RTTDC[c]. To test the efficacy and longitudinal effects of the
RTTDC[c] curriculum, t-tests were utilized. Results indicated
significant differences in knowledge of trauma treatment procedures
between pre-training knowledge scores (M = 8.60, SD = 2.50) and
post-training knowledge scores (M = 9.96, SD = 2.22), t (141) = -8.26, p
< .001. Assessment at three months post-training revealed no
significant differences between immediate post-training scores (M =
10.04, SD = 2.14) and three month post-training scores (M = 9.75, SD =
2.45), t (47) = .81, p = .42. Comparisons between three month
post-training scores (M = 9.55, SD = 2.17) and six month post-training
scores (M = 9.79, SD = 2.42), t (32) = -.87, p = .39) were not
significant. Therefore, knowledge of the RTTDC[c] curriculum does have
longitudinal and lasting effects on the personnel.
RTTDC[c]-Communication. To test the efficacy and longitudinal
effects of the RTTDC[c]-Communication curriculum, t-tests were utilized.
Results indicated significant differences in knowledge of the
communication process between immediate post-training scores (M = 6.56,
SD = 1.28) and three month post-training scores (M = 6.14, SD = 1.56), t
= (79) = 2.58, p < .05). Comparison between three month post-training
scores (M = 5.98, SD = 1.71) and six month post--training scores (M =
5.77, SD = 1.53) revealed no significant differences (t [47] = .83, p =
.41).
Trauma Transfer Time
To assess differences in the trauma patient transfer times at the
two bottleneck points as well as the number of squads contacted, a
series of One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tests were performed with
followup analysis (Duncan) where appropriate. Results indicated
significant differences among RTTDC[c], RTTDC[c]-Communication, and
control groups regarding time of arrival to decision to transfer (F [2,
336] = 3.38, p < .05) with the RTTDC[c]-Communication trained trauma
personnel and the RTTDC[c] trained trauma personnel reporting
significantly lower decision making times than trauma personnel
receiving no training. Table 1 reports the means and standard
deviations.
For time from decision to transfer until transport squad arrives,
RTTDC[c]-Communication trained trauma personnel reported significantly
shorter wait times for transport squad arrival than both RTTDC[c]
trained trauma personnel and personnel in the control group (F [2, 336]
= 7.37, p < .01). Table 2 reports the means and standard deviations.
In terms of the number of squads contacted, significant differences
were observed (F[2, 314] = 4.54, p < .01) with RTTDC[c]-Communication
trained trauma personnel contacting significantly fewer transport squads
than both RTTDC[c] and the control group. Table 3 reports the means and
standard deviations.
Discussion
The results of this research effort offers promising directions for
the interdisciplinary study of trauma medicine. More specifically,
scholars have long advocated the need to integrate communication into
the practice of medicine (Rogers, Osler et al., 1999; Rogers, Shackford
et al., 1999) but only recently have these efforts been attempted
(Rossi, Polack, Kappel, Avtgis, & Martin, 2008; Rossi, Polack,
Kappel, Avtgis, & Martin, 2009).
The fact that communication training as a whole, and affirming
communication in particular can result in an actual decrease in transfer
times concretizes the concept that effective communication in the
practice of trauma medical care can indeed save lives. Several studies
have demonstrated marked improvement for the trauma patient following
the development of an organized trauma system (Nathens, Jurkovich,
Rivara, Maier, 2000; Shackford, Hollingworth-Fridlund, Cooper, &
Eastman, 1986). However, researchers argue that part of having an
organized trauma system involves the implementation of mechanisms beyond
simple organization that results in the reduction of trauma transfer
times (Rossi et al., 2008, 2009). For example, technological
advancements are only as effective as the personnel operating the
technology. The use of communication technology is fully dependent not
only on the technological competence of the operator, but also on their
interpersonal and overall communication competence. More specifically,
the medical knowledge contained in the curriculum was not only retained
by participants via post training assessment, but the temporal effects
were lasting as evidenced by the lack of significant changes in
knowledge scores observed when comparing three month and six month
assessments. Although the content of communication training was retained
by participants via post training assessment, this was a dissipation
effect occurring between the immediate post training and three month
assessment. This dissipation effect that was observed in the three month
assessment remained stable as evidenced by a lack of statistically
significance difference observed when comparing the three month and six
month assessment scores.
These differing findings between the retention of medical knowledge
and communication knowledge should not be of surprise. That is, the
medical knowledge being taught through the RTTDC[c] consisted of
material that had to be utilized in a mindful fashion. By mindful, we
are referring to particular procedures that must be executed in
sequence. In contrast, the communication training was focused on the
development of communication competence in general, and affirming
communication in particular. The practice of such communication
behavior, unlike medical procedure, is not one of the mindful sequence
following as much as a style that one acquires and utilizes in a more
second-nature fashion. When considering the differing approaches of
teaching medical versus communication knowledge, one would expect that
there would be a decrease in cognitive knowledge retention of
communication terms and concepts as the focus of the training was on the
development of an affirming communication style and not necessarily on
an increase in concept definition and cognitive recall.
In light of the overarching findings of this research effort, the
RTTDC[c]-Communication curriculum, given its efficacy in the reduction
of trauma patient transfer times should be incorporated in the
establishment of any rural trauma network. In fact, the RTTDC[c] and
RTTDC[c]-Communication curricula developed and tested in these studies
have been recognized as the standard for medical information and
communication exchange in rural trauma by the Ad Hoc Rural Trauma
Committee of the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma and
are now part of the 3rd edition of the RTTDC[c] manual. This training is
advocated for all rural trauma medical systems, not just those within
the United States.
The results have demonstrated the effectiveness of both the
RTTDC[c] and the RTTDC[c]-Communication as cost effective alternatives
to the other system-wide efforts. Previous efforts have included new
systems integration, alternative transport modalities, and equipment or
technological acquisition to augment efficiency in the transfer and
transport of trauma patients. Unfortunately, all of these are
accompanied by large financial burdens for the individual institution
and the entire trauma system as a whole. The following axioms are
proffered as a direct result of the current research effort.
- Standardization of medical information and the effective
communication of that information must be instituted system wide.
- Human communication synchrony among trauma team members within
and between each facility is vital for efficient process coordination
resulting in increased patient safety and quality care.
- Human communication training is a vital skill for efficient and
effective trauma medical care.
- Effective rural trauma medical care is predicated on the trauma
team's ability to effectively relay all necessary information in
concise and competent ways.
These axioms, which are interdisciplinary in nature, provide the
foundation from which the unique challenges of rural trauma should be
conceptualized and approached. Given the ubiquitous nature of trauma
medicine, there is truly a cross-cultural application to combining
communication and medical knowledge in the most concise forms possible
yet to do so in a way that also serves to respect the sanctity and
cohesiveness of the trauma team and its members.
Limitations
Although there were limitations to this study such as unequal group
sizes and subject attrition, these issues are commonly encountered with
field experiments (see, for example, Rancer, Whitecap, Kosberg, &
Avtgis, 1997) and as such, should be considered in the interpretation of
the overall findings. It is in interdisciplinary efforts such as the one
described here that better patient care, improved patient safety, and
better trauma team coordination can be achieved thus improving any rural
trauma system regardless of culture.
References
Avtgis, T. A., & Chory, R. M. (2010). The dark side of
organizational life: Aggressive expression in the workplace. In T. A.
Avtgis & A. S. Rancer (Eds.), Arguments, aggression, and conflict
(pp. 285-304). New York: Routledge.
Avtgis, T. A., Polack, E. P., Martin, M. M., & Rossi, D. (in
press). Improve the communication, decrease the distance: The
investigation into problematic communication and delay in inter-hospital
transfer of rural trauma patient. Communication Education.
Avtgis, T. A., & Rancer, A. S. (2007a). The theory of
independent mindedness: An organizational theory for individualistic
cultures: In M. Hinner (Ed.), The role of communication in business
transactions and relationships: Freiberger beitrage zur interkulturellen
und wirtschaftskommunikation: A forum for general and intercultural
business communication (pp. 183-201). Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.
Avtgis, T. A., & Rancer, A. S. (2007b). A communication trait
based approach to superior-subordinate relationships: The theory of
independent mindedness. Business Research Yearbook, 24, 867-873.
Avtgis, T. A., & Rancer, A. S. (2010). Arguments, aggression,
and conflict: New directions in theory and research. New York:
Routledge.
Avtgis, T. A., Rancer, A. S., & Madlock, P. E. (2010).
Organizational communication: Strategies for success. Dubuque, IA:
Kendall Hunt
Bartlett, E. E., Grayson, M., Barker, R., Levine, D. M., Golden,
A., & Libber, S. (1984). The effects of physician communications
skills on patient satisfaction; Recall, and adherence. Journal of
Chronic Disease, 37, 755-764.
Beckman, H. B., Markakis, K. M., Suchman, A. L., & Frankel, R.
M. (1994). The doctor-patient relationship malpractice: Lessons from
plaintiff depositions. Archives of Internal Medicine, 154, 1365-1370.
Berlo, D. K. (1960). The process of communication. New York: Holt,
Rinehart, & Winston.
Britten, N., Stevenson, F. A., Barry, C. A., Barber, N., &
Bradley, C. P. (2000). Misunderstandings in prescribing decisions in
general practice: Qualitative study. BMJ, 320, 484-488.
Champion, H. R., Augenstein, J. S., Cushing, B., Digges, K. H.,
Hunt, R., Larkin, R., Milliaris, A. C., Sacco, W. J., & Siegel, J.
H. (1999). Urgency for a safer America. Air Medical Journal, 5, 18-23.
Cowley, R. A. (1975). A total emergency medical system for the
state of Maryland. Maryland State Medical Journal, 24, 37-45.
Eiseman, B. (1967). Combat casualty management in Vietnam. Journal
of Trauma, 7, 53-63.
Esposito, T. J., Sanddal, N. D., Hansen, J. D., & Reynolds, S.
(1995). Analysis of preventable trauma deaths and inappropriate trauma
care in a rural state. Journal of Trauma, 39, 955-962.
Garrity, T. F. (1981). Medical compliance and the clinician-patient
relationship: A review. Social Science & Medicine. Part E: Medical
Psychology, 15, 215-222.
Gonzales, R. P., Cummings, G., Mulekar, M., & Rodning, C. B.
(2006). Increased mortality in rural vehicular trauma: Identifying
contributing factors through data linkage. Journal of Trauma, 61,
404-409.
Greer, S. E., Kispert, P. H., Lane, M. L., Lin, M. P., & Gupta,
R. (September, 2007). Prolonged times to request transfer to regional
trauma centers contribute to delays in secondary triage. Paper presented
at the 3rd annual North Dakota Rural Surgery Symposium, Grand Forks, ND.
Infante, D. A. (1987a, July). Argumentativeness in
superior-subordinate communication: A essential condition for
organizational productivity. Paper presented at the annual meeting of
the American Forensic summer conference of the Speech Communication
Association, Alta, UT.
Infante, D. A. (1987b, May). An independent-mindedness model of
organizational productivity: The role of communication education. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Communication
Association, Syracuse, NY.
Infante, D. A. (1988). Arguing constructively. Prospect Heights,
IL: Waveland.
Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Avtgis, T. A. (2010).
Contemporary communication theory. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
Jordan-Jackson, F. E., Lin, Y., Rancer, A. S., & Infante, D. A.
(2008). Perceptions of males and females' use of aggressive
affirming and nonaffirming messages in an interpersonal dispute:
You've come a long way baby? Western Journal of Communication, 72,
239-258.
Kappel, D. A., Rossi, D. C., Polack, E. P., Avtgis, T. A., &
Martin, M. M. (2009). Does the RTTDC[c] (rural trauma team development
course[c]) shorten the interval from trauma patient arrival to decision
to transfer? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western Trauma
Association, Crested Butte, CO.
Karsteadt, L. L., Larsen, C. L., & Farmer, P. D. (1994).
Analysis of a rural trauma program using the TRISS methodology: A three
year retrospective study. Journal of Trauma, 36, 395-400.
Nathens, A. B., Jurkovich, G. J., Rivara, F. P., & Maier, R. V.
(2000). Effectiveness of state trauma systems in reducing injury-related
mortality: A national evaluation. Journal of Trauma, 48, 25-31.
National Academy of Science. (1966). Accidental death and
disability: The neglected disease of modern society. Washington, DC.
Norton, R. W. (1983). Communicator style. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Peek-Asa, C., Zwerling, C., & Stallones, L. (2004). Acute
traumatic injuries in rural populations. American Journal of Public
Health, 94, 1689-1693.
Polack, E. P., Avtgis, T. A., Kappel, D., & Martin, M. M.
(2010, May). Testing the temporal effects of a rural trauma personnel.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Communication
Association, Baltimore, MD.
Polack, E. P., Avtgis, T. A., & Kappel, D. (2009). Getting your
message across: Riral trauma training development course (3rd ed.).
Chicago, IL: American College of Surgeons.
Polack, E. P., Avtgis, T. A., Rossi, D., & Shaffer, L. (2010).
A team approach in communication instruction: A qualitative approach.
Journal of Surgical Education, 67, 125-128.
Polack, E. P., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (2008).
Applied communication for health professionals. Dubuque, IA: Kendall
Hunt.
Rancer, A. S., & Avtgis, T. A. (2006). Argumentative and
aggressive communication: Theory, research, and application. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rancer, A. S., Whitecap, V., Kosberg, R. L., & Avtgis, T. A.
(1997). Testing the efficacy of a communication training program to
increase argumentativeness and argumentative behavior in adolescents.
Communication Education, 46, 273-286.
Rogers, F. B., Osler, T. M., Turner, M., Shackford, S. R., Camp,
L., & Lesage, M. (1999). Study of the outcome of patients
transferred to a Level I hospital in a rural setting. Journal of Trauma:
Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 46, 328-333.
Rogers, F. B., Shackford, S. R., Osler, T. M., Turner, M., Vane, D.
W., & Davis, J. H. (1999). Rural trauma: The challenge for the next
decade. Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 47,
802.
Rossi, D., Polack, E. P., Kappel, D., Avtgis, T. A., & Martin,
M. M. (September, 2008). Phase II: It's not about being nice;
It's about being a better doctor: The investigation into
problematic communication and delays in trauma patient transfer.
Paperpresented at the annual meeting of the American Acedemy of
Communication in Healthcare, Madison, WI.
Rossi, D., Polack, E. P., Kappel, D., Avtgis, T. A., & Martin,
M. M. (February, 2009). Does the rural trauma team development course
shorten the interval from trauma patient arrival to decision to
transfer? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western Trauma
Association, Crested Butte, CO.
Rural Task Force Report to the Secretary. (July, 2002). One
department serving rural America. Washington, DC: Department of Health
and Human Services.
Rural Trauma Committee of the American College of Surgeons
Committee on Trauma. (2006). Rural trauma training development course
(2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: American College of Surgeons.
Santy, P. (1918). Marquis moulinier, Da Shock Tramatique dans les
blessures de Guerre, Analysis d'observations. Bulletin de la
Societe de Chirurgie de Paris, 44, 205. Retrieved August 23, 2007, from
http://www.trauma.org/archive/history/resuscitation. html.
Shackford, S. R., Hollingworth-Fridlund, P., Cooper, G. F., &
Eastman, A. B. (1986). The effect of regionalization upon the quality of
trauma care as assessed by concurrent audit before and after institution
of a trauma system: A preliminary report. Journal of Trauma, 26,
812-820.
Starr, P. (1982). The social transformation of American medicine:
The rise of a sovereign profession and the making of a vast industry.
New York: Basic Books.
Stewart, D. W., & Shamdasani, P. N. (1990). Focus groups:
Theory and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Thompson, T. L., Dorsey, A. M., Miller, K. I., & Parrott, R.
(2003). Handbook of health communication. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Trunkey, D. (1983). Trauma. Scientific American, 249, 28-36.
Waller, J. A., Curran, R., & Noyes, F. (1964). Traffic deaths:
A preliminary study of urban and rural fatalities in California.
California Medicine, 101, 272-276.
Theodore A. Avtgis, West Virginia University
E. Phillips Polack, West Virginia University
Correspondence to:
Dr. Theodore A. Avtgis
Department of Communication
West Virginia University
108 Armstrong Hall
PO Box 6293
Morgantown, WV 26506-6293
Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations for
Time of Arrival until Decision to Transfer
Condition M SD
RTTDC [95.72.sub.a] 92.07
RTTDC-Communication [77.17.sub.b] 69.95
Control [114.35.sub.ab] 82.97
Note: Means sharing subscripts differ at the p
< .05 level based on Duncan follow-up analyses.
Table 2. Means and Standard Deviations for Time
from Decision to Transfer until Squad Arrives
Condition M SD
RTTDC [67.19.sub.ab] 55.26
RTTDC-Communication [31.13.sub.b] 30.45
Control [77.35.sub.b] 67.13
Note: Means sharing subscripts differ at the p
< .01 level based on Duncan follow-up analysis.
Table 3. Means and Standard Deviations
for Number of Squads Contacted
Condition M SD
RTTDC [1.13.sub.ab] .49
RTTDC-Communication [.86.sub.a] .35
Control [1.19.sub.b] .67
Note: Means sharing subscripts differ at the p
< .01 level based on Duncan follow-up analysis.