Stylized map of Denmark symbolizing interconnected trauma care networks.

Trauma Care in Denmark: How Prepared Are They?

Soraya Malik in Health & Wellness August 2025 • 4 min read.

"A nationwide study benchmarks trauma facilities, revealing strengths and key areas for improvement in the Danish system."

Trauma is a leading cause of death for individuals under 44, making effective trauma care a critical component of any healthcare system. Centralizing trauma services and utilizing multidisciplinary trauma teams are recognized as key strategies for improving patient outcomes. However, the specifics of how trauma care is organized can vary significantly.

To better understand the landscape of trauma care in Denmark, a comprehensive study was conducted to identify all facilities providing trauma care and to analyze the structure of their trauma management protocols. This research sheds light on the diversity of approaches used across the country.

This article will delve into the findings of this nationwide study, focusing on the organization of trauma facilities, the criteria used to activate trauma teams, the composition of those teams, and the training protocols in place. By exploring these elements, we can gain valuable insights into the strengths and potential areas for improvement within the Danish trauma care system.

Decoding Denmark's Trauma Facilities: Key Findings

Stylized map of Denmark symbolizing interconnected trauma care networks.

The study identified 22 hospitals in Denmark that receive and treat traumatized patients. A key element found in all facilities was the use of a trauma care manual and the presence of a multidisciplinary trauma team. However, beyond these commonalities, significant variations emerged.

Researchers uncovered three distinct sets of criteria used to activate trauma teams. Activation might depend on a scoring system, anatomical criteria, physiological parameters, or the mechanism of injury. Furthermore, the composition of trauma teams varied considerably, with nine different team structures identified. Training levels also differed across facilities, and beyond the major trauma centers, the maintenance of trauma databases was inconsistent.

Activation Criteria: Three different sets of criteria were used to activate trauma teams, leading to potential inconsistencies in when and how teams are mobilized.
Team Composition: Nine different team compositions were identified, suggesting a lack of standardization in who responds to trauma cases.
Training: Training protocols varied, potentially affecting the preparedness and skills of trauma teams across different facilities.
Data Collection: Beyond major trauma centers, the maintenance of trauma databases was inconsistent, limiting the ability to track outcomes and identify areas for improvement.

The findings highlight a need for greater standardization and data collection within the Danish trauma care system. While all facilities had trauma care manuals and multidisciplinary teams, the variations in activation criteria, team composition, and training raise questions about the consistency and quality of care delivered across the country.

The Road Ahead: Strengthening Trauma Care in Denmark

This study provides a valuable benchmark of trauma facilities in Denmark, revealing both the strengths and weaknesses of the current system. The presence of trauma care manuals and multidisciplinary teams in all facilities is a positive finding. However, the heterogeneity in activation criteria, team composition, and training highlights a need for greater standardization.

The authors advocate for the establishment of a national database for traumatized patients. This would enable more accurate tracking of outcomes, facilitate the use of evidence-based guidelines, and allow for a more precise assessment of the effectiveness of different activation criteria.

Ultimately, this research underscores the importance of ongoing evaluation and improvement in trauma care. By addressing the identified variations and promoting greater standardization, Denmark can further optimize its trauma care system and improve outcomes for patients.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.1186/s13049-018-0486-1, Alternate LINK

Title: Trauma Facilities In Denmark - A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Benchmark Study Of Facilities And Trauma Care Organisation

Subject: Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Journal: Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine

Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Authors: Jesper Weile, Klaus Nielsen, Stine C. Primdahl, Christian A. Frederiksen, Christian B. Laursen, Erik Sloth, Ole Mølgaard, Lars Knudsen, Hans Kirkegaard

Published: 2018-03-27

Everything You Need To Know

What are the basic components of trauma care in Denmark, according to the nationwide study?

Trauma care in Denmark involves 22 hospitals that treat traumatized patients. All facilities use a trauma care manual and have a multidisciplinary trauma team. However, the activation criteria for these teams vary; some use scoring systems, others anatomical criteria, physiological parameters, or the mechanism of injury. The composition of the trauma teams also differs significantly, with nine different team structures identified.

What key variations were identified in the organization and protocols of trauma facilities across Denmark?

The study found variations in activation criteria, team composition, training protocols, and data collection practices. Specifically, three different sets of criteria are used to activate trauma teams, nine different team compositions were identified, training levels differed across facilities, and trauma database maintenance was inconsistent outside major trauma centers. These inconsistencies may affect the quality of care delivered across the country and limit the ability to track outcomes and improve the system.

What are the implications of having inconsistent activation criteria for trauma teams in Denmark's hospitals?

Having inconsistent activation criteria for trauma teams means there's a risk that patients who need immediate trauma care might not receive it promptly in some facilities. If activation depends on various scoring systems, anatomical criteria, physiological parameters, or the mechanism of injury and these are applied differently across hospitals, some patients could experience delays in receiving the necessary interventions, potentially worsening their outcomes. This highlights the need for a standardized approach to ensure timely and appropriate responses to trauma cases throughout Denmark.

Why is a multidisciplinary trauma team so important, and what did the study reveal about the composition of these teams in Denmark?

A multidisciplinary trauma team is crucial for delivering comprehensive trauma care because it brings together experts from various medical specialties to address the complex needs of trauma patients. These teams typically include surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, and other specialists who work together to assess, stabilize, and treat patients with severe injuries. The study identified nine different team compositions, indicating a lack of standardization that could impact the efficiency and effectiveness of trauma care across different facilities.

How do inconsistencies in data collection impact the ability to improve trauma care outcomes in Denmark?

The inconsistencies in data collection, particularly outside major trauma centers, limit the ability to track patient outcomes and identify areas for improvement within the Danish trauma care system. Without consistent data, it becomes challenging to assess the effectiveness of different treatment approaches, identify trends in patient outcomes, and implement targeted interventions to enhance the quality of care. Standardized data collection is essential for continuous quality improvement and ensuring the best possible outcomes for trauma patients.