The impact of trauma systems on patient outcomes

Level One Trauma Center Proliferation May Worsen Patient Outcomes

BACKGROUND

From 2013 to 2020, Arizona state trauma system expanded from seven to thirteen level 1 trauma centers (L1TCs). This study utilized the state trauma registry to analyze the effect of L1TC proliferation on patient outcomes.

METHODS

Adult patients age≥15 in the state trauma registry from 2007-2020 were queried for demographic, injury, and outcome variables. These variables were compared across the 2 time periods: 2007-2012 as pre-proliferation (PRE) and 2013-2020 as post-proliferation (POST). Multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess independent predictors of mortality. Subgroup analyses were done for Injury Severity Score (ISS)≥15, age≥65, and trauma mechanisms.

RESULTS

A total of 482,896 trauma patients were included in this study. 40% were female, 29% were geriatric patients, and 8.6% sustained penetrating trauma. The median ISS was 4. Inpatient mortality overall was 2.7%. POST consisted of more female, geriatric, and blunt trauma patients (P < .001). Both periods had similar median ISS. POST had more interfacility transfers (14.5% vs 10.3%, P < .001). Inpatient, unadjusted mortality decreased by .5% in POST (P < .001). After adjusting for age, gender, ISS, and trauma mechanism, being in POST was predictive of death (OR: 1.4, CI:1.3-1.5, P < .001). This was consistent across all subgroups except for geriatric subgroup, which there was no significant correlation.

DISCUSSION

Despite advances in trauma care and almost doubling of L1TCs, POST had minimal reduction of unadjusted mortality and was an independent predictor of death. Results suggest increasing number of L1TCs alone may not improve mortality. Alternative approaches should be sought with future regional trauma system design and implementation.

Trauma systems in high socioeconomic index countries in 2050

Considerable political, structural, environmental and epidemiological change will affect high socioeconomic index (SDI) countries over the next 25 years. These changes will impact healthcare provision and consequently trauma systems. This review attempts to anticipate the potential impact on trauma systems and how they could adapt to meet the changing priorities. The first section describes possible epidemiological trajectories. A second section exposes existing governance and funding challenges, how these can be met, and the need to incorporate data and information science into a learning and adaptive trauma system. The last section suggests an international harmonization of trauma education to improve care standards, optimize immediate and long-term patient needs and enhance disaster preparedness and crisis resilience. By demonstrating their capacity for adaptation, trauma systems can play a leading role in the transformation of care systems to tackle future health challenges.

A Statewide Analysis of Predictors of Trauma Center Transfer: The Burden of Non-Clinical Factors

OBJECTIVES

There is a perception, with mixed literary support, that patients are transferred from community hospitals to tertiary medical centers for non-clinical reasons (ie, payor, race, and admission time). Over-triage risks unequally burdening the tertiary medical centers within a trauma system. This study aims to identify potential non-clinical factors associated with the transfer of injured patients.

METHODS

Using the 2018 North Carolina State Inpatient Database, patients with a primary diagnosis of spine, rib or extremity fractures, or TBI were identified using ICD-10-CM code and admission type of "Urgent," "Emergency," or "Trauma." Patients were divided into cohorts of "retained" (at community hospital) or "transferred" (Level-1 or 2 trauma centers).

RESULTS

11,095 patients met inclusion criteria; 2432 (21.9%) patients made up the transfer cohort. The mean ISS for all retained patients was 2.2 (±.9) and 2.9 (±1.4) for all transferred patients. The transfer cohort was younger (mean age 66 v 75.8), underinsured, and more likely to be admitted after 1700 (P < .001). Similar differences were seen regardless of injury pattern.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients transferred to trauma centers were more likely to be underinsured and be admitted outside of normal business hours. These transferred patients had longer lengths of stay and higher mortality rates. Across all cohorts, similar ISS suggests that a portion of the transfers could be managed at a community hospital. After hours transfers suggest a need for more robust community hospital coverage. Intentional triage of the injured patient encourages appropriate utilization of resources and is crucial to maintaining high-functioning trauma centers and systems.

Presence of Permanent Pacemakers: Implications for Elderly Patients Presenting with Traumatic Injuries

Background

The presence of permanent pacemakers (PPM) is common among the elderly population. Trauma literature has shown that the inability to augment cardiac output by at least 30% after injury portends a higher mortality. The presence of a PPM may be a surrogate marker to identify patients who are unable to increase cardiac output. We aimed to evaluate the association between the presence of PPM and clinical outcomes in elderly patients presenting with traumatic injuries.

Methods

A total of 4505 patients aged ≥65 years admitted with acute trauma from 2009 to 2019 at our Level I Trauma center were evaluated and stratified into two groups using propensity matching on age, sex, injury severity score (ISS), and year of admission based on the presence of PPM. Logistic regression was performed to analyze the impact of the presence of PPM on mortality, surgical intensive care unit (SICU) admission, operative intervention, and length of stay. Prevalence of cardiovascular comorbidities was compared using χ2 analysis.

Results

Data from 208 patients with PPM and 208 propensity-matched controls were evaluated. Charlson Comorbidity Index, mechanism of injury, intensive care unit admission, and rate of operative intervention were comparable in the two groups. PPM patients had more coronary artery disease (p=0.04), heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (p=0.003), atrial fibrillation (AF, p<0.0001), and antithrombotic use (p<0.0001). We found no association between mortality amongst the groups after controlling for influencing variables (OR=2.1 (0.97 to 4.74), p=0.061). Patient characteristics associated with survival included female sex (p=0.009), lower ISS (p<0.0001), lower revised trauma score (p<0.0001), and lower SICU admission (p=0.001).

Conclusion

Our study shows no association between mortality among patients with PPM admitted for treatment of trauma. Presence of a PPM may be an indicator of cardiovascular disease, but this does not translate into increased risk in the modern era of trauma management in our patient population.

Level of evidence

Level III.

Long-term health-related quality of life after trauma with and without traumatic brain injury: a prospective cohort study

To purpose was to assess and compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and risk of depression two years after trauma, between patients with and without traumatic brain injury (TBI) in a mixed Swedish trauma cohort. In this prospective cohort study, TBI and non-TBI trauma patients included in the Swedish Trauma registry 2019 at a level II trauma center in Stockholm, Sweden, were contacted two years after admission. HRQoL was assessed with RAND-36 and EQ-5D-3L, and depression with Montgomery Åsberg depression Rating Scale self-report (MADRS-S). Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS) head was used to grade TBI severity, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score was used to assess comorbidities. Data were compared using Chi-squared test, Mann Whitney U test and ordered logistic regression, and Bonferroni correction was applied. A total of 170 of 737 eligible patients were included. TBI was associated with higher scores in 5/8 domains of RAND-36 and 3/5 domains of EQ-5D (p < 0.05). No significant difference in MADRS-S. An AIS (head) of three or higher was associated with lower scores in five domains of RAND-36 and two domains of EQ-5D but not for MADRS-S. An ASA-score of three was associated with lower scores in all domains of both RAND-36 (p < 0.05, except mental health) and EQ-5D (p < 0.001, except anxiety/depression), but not for MADRS-S. In conclusion, patients without TBI reported a lower HRQoL than TBI patients two years after trauma. TBI severity assessed according to AIS (head) was associated with HRQoL, and ASA-score was found to be a predictor of HRQoL, emphasizing the importance of considering pre-injury health status when assessing outcomes in TBI patients.

Is New York State good at managing hollow viscus injury?

BACKGROUND

There are an estimated 100,000 cases of abdominal injury (ABI) in the USA, annually resulting in over $12 billion in direct medical cost and $18 billion in lost productivity. This study assesses the timeliness, safety, and efficacy of the surgical management of abdominal injuries (ABIs), hollow viscus injuries (HVIs), and colonic injuries (CIs) for patients residing in New York State (NYS).

METHODS

Using data from NYS's Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS), we identified all trauma patients with ABI admitted between 2006 and 2015. We subdivided ABI into HVI and CI using diagnosis and procedure codes and examined processes of care and outcomes adjusting for patient characteristics, injury severity score, structural, and process indicators.

RESULTS

We identified 31,043 hospitalized patients with ABI, 71% were incurred from blunt forces. Most patients with ABI (72%) were treated at a Level I/II trauma center (TC) and 7% patients were transferred to Level I/II TC. Failure to be treated at Level I/II TC was associated with 16% increased hazard of death. HVI was diagnosed in 23% of ABI patients (n = 7294); 18% experienced delayed hollow viscus repair (dHVR); dHVR was associated with a 76% increased hazard of death. CI was diagnosed in 9% of ABI patients (n = 2921) and 18% experienced dHVR. Seventy-five percent of CI were repaired primarily (n = 1354). Less than 37% of stomas were reversed by 4 years of index trauma.

CONCLUSION

Most abdominal trauma in NYS was caused by motor vehicle accidents, falls, and assault. dHVR and not being treated at Level I/II TC were associated with worse outcomes. More research is needed to reduce under-triage and delays in the operative treatment of blunt abdominal trauma.

Candida pericarditis presenting with cardiac tamponade and multiple organ failure after combined damage control thoracotomy and laparotomy with splenectomy in a trauma patient: Case report and review of literature

Candida pericarditis is a rare condition which has previously been described after cardiothoracic surgery and immunosuppressive states (Geisler et al., 1981; Eng et al., 1981; Kraus et al., 1988; Kaufman et al., 1988; Tang et al., 2009; Glower et al., 1990; Carrel et al., 1991; Rabinovici et al., 1997; Canver et al., 1998; Farjah et al., 2005; Gronemeyer et al., 1982 [1-11]). We describe the case of a 19-year-old male blunt trauma patient, who survived a damage control thoracotomy and laparotomy with splenectomy, who later developed a loculated Candida pericardial effusion, complicated with cardiac tamponade and multiple organ failure, and required antifungals and surgical reintervention with thoracotomy for drainage. A literature search of the reported cases demonstrates that Candida pericarditis is indeed a rare but fatal condition if not identified and treated appropriately. This article discusses the difficulties we encountered while recognizing the disorder in our patient and proposes a guideline to adequately treat the condition in an effective and timely manner. Candida pericarditis poses a special challenge for the physician since its correct diagnosis and management requires a multidisciplinary approach.

The Pathophysiology and Management of Hemorrhagic Shock in the Polytrauma Patient

The recognition and management of life-threatening hemorrhage in the polytrauma patient poses several challenges to prehospital rescue personnel and hospital providers. First, identification of acute blood loss and the magnitude of lost volume after torso injury may not be readily apparent in the field. Because of the expression of highly effective physiological mechanisms that compensate for a sudden decrease in circulatory volume, a polytrauma patient with a significant blood loss may appear normal during examination by first responders. Consequently, for every polytrauma victim with a significant mechanism of injury we assume substantial blood loss has occurred and life-threatening hemorrhage is progressing until we can prove the contrary. Second, a decision to begin damage control resuscitation (DCR), a costly, highly complex, and potentially dangerous intervention must often be reached with little time and without sufficient clinical information about the intended recipient. Whether to begin DCR in the prehospital phase remains controversial. Furthermore, DCR executed imperfectly has the potential to worsen serious derangements including acidosis, coagulopathy, and profound homeostatic imbalances that DCR is designed to correct. Additionally, transfusion of large amounts of homologous blood during DCR potentially disrupts immune and inflammatory systems, which may induce severe systemic autoinflammatory disease in the aftermath of DCR. Third, controversy remains over the composition of components that are transfused during DCR. For practical reasons, unmatched liquid plasma or freeze-dried plasma is transfused now more commonly than ABO-matched fresh frozen plasma. Low-titer type O whole blood may prove safer than red cell components, although maintaining an inventory of whole blood for possible massive transfusion during DCR creates significant challenges for blood banks. Lastly, as the primary principle of management of life-threatening hemorrhage is surgical or angiographic control of bleeding, DCR must not eclipse these definitive interventions.