Conclusions
By itself, each trauma registry, i.e. the German Pelvic
Injury Register and the TraumaRegister DGUW, reflects
a valid source for documenting injured patients in accordance
of the emphasis of each registry, respectively.
The linkage of these two registries enabled new insights
into medical practices for multiple trauma patients with
pelvic ring fractures including initial fluid resuscitation
and the incidence of traumatic coagulopathy. Inconsistency
between clinical PIR and TR data, however, revealed
that efforts must be made to ensure high data
quality and acceptable population coverage in the future.
Present considerations and developments of both registries
should take place in close consultation, with the
aim of benefiting from complementary data. It is conceivable
to integrate individual modules, e.g. a pelvic
fracture module, into the TraumaRegister DGUW likewise
a modular system. This action would represent a
future technical challenge for database programming.