Traumatic Minor Intracranial Hemorrhage: Management by Non-neurosurgeon Consultants in a Regional Trauma Center is Safe and Effective

The changing landscape of traumatic brain injuries at a district general hospital in a trauma network

BACKGROUND

Major trauma networks were introduced in 2012 onwards with a major trauma centre (MTC) linked to district general hospitals (DGH). Most traumatic brain injuries (TBI) are managed in DGHs, without on-site neurosurgical services. It is unclear whether the characteristics of TBIs at DGHs have differed since the network was introduced. We compare outcomes of TBI patients pre- (2008-2012) and post-MTC (2013-2021) network implementation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of TBI patients admitted to a 500-bedded DGH, before and after the introduction of a trauma network. We compared the characteristics of patients, including age, mechanism of injury, imaging findings, and length of stay. All statistical analyses were carried out in SPSS v29 (IBM).

RESULTS

Overall, 876 patients (males = 56.1%; median age 67 years) were included. Mean yearly cases pre-MTC was 76 compared to 55 in the post-MTC period. Mean age was significantly higher, and patients had more co-morbidities, in the post-MTC period (p < 0.001). Mean GCS at presentation was not significantly different between the pre- and post-MTC periods (13.7 vs 13.8, respectively). Referrals to the regional neurosurgical centre were significantly higher in the post-MTC period. The overall mortality rate was 33.7%. Increasing age (OR = 1.072), higher comorbidities (OR = 1.243) and intracerebral haematoma (OR = 6.269) were associated with a higher risk of death. The post-MTC period was associated with a lower risk of death (OR = 0.501).

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer patients with less severe mechanisms of injury, and a more elderly population are now being managed at our DGH in the post-MTC period. Mortality was similar to published literature but the introduction of the trauma system was associated with lower risk of death. Although fewer TBIs help to optimise service delivery by maintaining orthopaedic bed capacity, the reduced exposure to these patients may lead to lowered expertise in managing these complex cases.

Leveraging an EHR tool to improve provider adherence to the modified brain injury guidelines

INTRODUCTION

The aim was to leverage electronic health record (EHR) smartphrases to improve compliance with the modified Brain Injury Guidelines (mBIG).

METHODS

Smartphrases were developed for the trauma team and radiology and implemented December 2022. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients meeting mBIG inclusion from 03/2021- 07/2023 were reviewed. Smartphrase usage and clinical compliance with mBIG (measured by percent reduction of repeat head imaging, ICU admissions, and neurosurgery consults) were compared pre- and post-intervention.

RESULTS

268 cases were examined. Post-intervention, mBIG1 patients had significantly fewer neurosurgery consults (82.4 ​% vs. 50.0 ​%, OR ​= ​0.21, p ​= ​0.03), while mBIG2 patients had significantly fewer repeat head CTs (91.0 ​% vs. 66.7 ​%, OR ​= ​0.2, p ​= ​0.01), ICU admissions (66.7 ​% vs. 38.5 ​%, OR ​= ​0.31, p ​= ​0.02) and neurosurgery consults (93.9 ​% vs. 56.4 ​%, OR ​= ​0.08, p ​< ​0.01).

CONCLUSION

Standardized smartphrases can streamline workflow and significantly improve trauma team compliance with best practice guidelines for TBI and reduce unnecessary imaging, consults, and costly ICU admissions.

A Criteria to Reduce Interhospital Transfer of Traumatic Brain Injuries in Greater East Texas

BACKGROUND

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) due to single-level falls (SLF) are frequent and often require interhospital transfer. This retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the safety of a criteria for non-transfer among a subset of TBI patients who could be observed at their local hospital, vs mandatory transfer to a level 1 trauma center (L1TC).

METHODS

We conducted a 7-year review of patients with TBI due to SLF at a rural L1TC. Patients were classified as transfer/non-transfer according to the Brain Injuries in Greater East Texas (BIGTEX) criteria. The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of a critical event defined as deteriorating repeat head computed tomography (CT) scan or neurological status, neurosurgical intervention, or death.

RESULTS

Of the 689 included patients, 63 (9.1%) were classified as non-transfer. Although there were 4 cases with a neurological change and one with a head CT change among the non-transfer group, there were no neurosurgical procedures or deaths. The Cox Proportional Hazard model showed a near 3-fold increased risk of experiencing a critical event if classified as a non-transfer. The multivariable regression model showed patients with an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) of 3 was twice as likely to experience a critical event, with an AIS of 4, three times, and 3 times more likely to be classified to transfer.

DISCUSSION

The BIGTEX criteria identify a subset of patients who can safely be observed at their local hospital. To confirm the safety and efficacy of this transfer criteria recommendation, a prospective study is warranted.

External validation of the updated Brain Injury Guidelines for complicated mild traumatic brain injuries: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Approximately 10% of patients with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) have intracranial bleeding (complicated mTBI) and 3.5% eventually require neurosurgical intervention, which is mostly available at centers with a higher level of trauma care designation and often requires interhospital transfer. In 2018, the Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG) were updated in the United States to guide emergency department care and patient disposition for complicated mild to moderate TBI. The aim of this study was to validate the sensitivity and specificity of the updated BIG (uBIG) for predicting the need for interhospital transfer in Canadian patients with complicated mTBI.

METHODS

This study took place at three level I trauma centers. Consecutive medical records of patients with complicated mTBI (Glasgow Coma Scale score 13-15) who were aged ≥ 16 years and presented between September 2016 and December 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with a penetrating trauma and those who had a documented cerebral tumor or aneurysm were excluded. The primary outcome was a combination of neurosurgical intervention and/or mTBI-related death. Sensitivity and specificity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 477 patients were included, of whom 8.4% received neurosurgical intervention and 3% died as a result of their mTBI. Forty patients (8%) were classified as uBIG-1, 168 (35%) as uBIG-2, and 269 (56%) as uBIG-3. No patients in uBIG-1 underwent neurosurgical intervention or died as a result of their injury. This translates into a sensitivity for predicting the need for a transfer of 100% (95% CI 93.2%-100%) and a specificity of 9.4% (95% CI 6.8%-12.6%). Using the uBIG could potentially reduce the number of transfers by 6% to 25%.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients in uBIG-1 could be safely managed at their initial center without the need for transfer to a center with a higher level of neurotrauma care. Although the uBIG could decrease the number of transfers, further refinement of the criteria could improve its specificity.

The Impact of Preinjury Use of Antiplatelet Drugs on Outcomes of Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

The study aimed to compare outcomes of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in patients on pre-injury antiplatelet drugs vs. those, not on any antiplatelet or anticoagulant drugs.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar databases were searched up to 15th May 2021. All cohort studies comparing outcomes of TBI between antiplatelet users vs. non-users were included.

Results

Twenty studies were included. On comparison of data of 2,447 patients on pre-injury antiplatelet drugs with 4,814 controls, our analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in early mortality between the two groups (OR: 1.30 95% CI: 0.85, 1.98 I² = 80% p = 0.23). Meta-analysis of adjusted data also revealed no statistically significant difference in early mortality between antiplatelet users vs. controls (OR: 1.24 95% CI: 0.93, 1.65 I² = 41% p = 0.14). Results were similar for subgroup analysis of aspirin users and clopidogrel users. Data on functional outcomes was scarce and only descriptive analysis could be carried out. For the need for surgical intervention, pooled analysis did not demonstrate any statistically significant difference between the two groups (OR: 1.11 95% CI: 0.83, 1.48 I² = 55% p = 0.50). Length of hospital stay (LOS) was also not found to be significantly different between antiplatelet users vs. non-users (MD: −1.00 95% CI: −2.17, 0.17 I² = 97% p = 0.09).

Conclusion

Our results demonstrate that patients on pre-injury antiplatelet drugs do not have worse early mortality rates as compared to patients, not on any antiplatelet or anticoagulant drugs. The use of antiplatelets is not associated with an increased need for neurosurgical intervention and prolonged LOS.

Understanding secondary overtriage for neurosurgical patients in a rural tertiary care setting

OBJECTIVE

Excessive interfacility transfer to a tertiary care facility of minimally injured patients for subspecialty evaluation leads to overuse of resources and is referred to as secondary overtriage (SO). Little is known regarding the epidemiology of SO in rural settings, particularly for patients with a mild head injury who may be safely managed without admission to level I trauma centers.

METHODS

In order to determine the rate of SO for neurosurgical patients with Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) of 13-15 referred to a rural level 1 trauma center, we conducted a retrospective chart review of 224 patients evaluated for potential transfer to Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. SO was defined as any admission where a patient was transferred from an outside facility, had a length of stay shorter than 48 h, did not require neurosurgical intervention, and was alive at the time of discharge.

RESULTS

Of the 224 patients evaluated, 163 patients were transferred. Of the 163 patients included in this study, 43 (26.4%) met criteria for SO, 59 (36.2%) patients met criteria for intervention, and 61 (37.2%) patients met criteria for observation.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately a quarter of the total patients who are transferred to a rural level I trauma center for neurosurgical evaluation are minimally injured, do not require neurosurgical intervention, and are discharged within 48 h of presentation. Management at their referring facility with remote neurosurgical consultation is likely safe in this population. Understanding the rate of SO in neurosurgical patients and risk factors present in this group can better guide future transfer policies at rural medical centers.

Retrospective analysis of small intracranial hemorrhage in trauma: Is acute care surgery team management alone safe?

Background: The Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG) provide a validated framework for categorizing patients with small intracranial haemorrhages (ICH) who could be managed by acute care surgery without neurosurgical consultation or repeat head computed tomography in the absence of neurological deterioration. This replication study retrospectively applied BIG criteria to ICH subjects and only included BIG1 and BIG2 subjects.Methods: The trauma registry was queried from 2014 to 2019 for subjects with a traumatic ICH <1 cm, Glasgow Coma Scale score of 14/15 and not on anticoagulation therapy. Patients were then categorized under BIG 1 or BIG2 and outcomes were evaluated.Results: Two hundred fourteen subjects were reviewed (88 BIG1 and 126 BIG2). Twenty-three subjects had worse repeat imaging, but only one had worsening exam that resolved spontaneously. None required neurosurgical intervention. One died of non-neurological causes.Conclusions: Retrospective analysis supported our hypothesis that patients categorized as BIG1 or BIG2 could have been safely managed by acute care surgeons without neurosurgical consultation or repeat head imaging. A review of minor worsening on repeat imaging without changes in neurological exams and no need for neurosurgical interventions supports this evidence-based approach to the management of small intracranial haemorrhages.

Mild Head Trauma: Is Antiplatelet Therapy a Risk Factor for Hemorrhagic Complications?

Background and objectives: In patients who receive antiplatelet therapy (APT), the bleeding risk profile after mild head trauma (MHT) still needs clarification. Some studies have demonstrated an association with bleeding risk, whereas others have not. We studied the population of our level II emergency department (ED) trauma center to determine the risk of bleeding in patients receiving APT and whether bleeding results not from antiplatelet agents but rather from age. We assessed the bleeding risk, the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) that necessitated hospitalization for observation, the need for cranial neurosurgery, the severity of the patient's condition at discharge, and the frequency of ED revisits for head trauma in patients receiving APT. Materials and Methods: This retrospective single-center study included 483 patients receiving APT who were in the ED for MHT in 2019. The control group consisted of 1443 patients in the ED with MHT over the same period who were not receiving APT or anticoagulant therapy. Our ED diagnostic therapeutic protocol mandates both triage and the medical examination to identify patients with MHT who are taking any anticoagulant or APT. Results: APT was not significantly associated with bleeding risk (p > 0.05); as a risk factor, age was significantly associated with the risk of bleeding, even after adjustment for therapy. Patients receiving APT had a greater need of surgery (1.2% vs. 0.4%; p < 0.0001) and a higher rate of hospitalization (52.9% vs. 37.4%; p < 0.0001), and their clinical condition was more severe (evaluated according to the exit code value on a one-dimensional quantitative five-point numerical scale) at the time of discharge (p = 0.013). The frequency of ED revisits due to head trauma did not differ between the two groups. Conclusions: The risk of bleeding in patients receiving APT who had MHT was no higher than that in the control group. However, the clinical condition of patients receiving APT, including hospital admission for ICH monitoring and cranial neurosurgical interventions, was more severe.