Compliance to prehospital trauma triage protocols worldwide: A systematic review

Exploring patient and system factors impacting undertriage of injured patients meeting national field triage guideline criteria

BACKGROUND

Trauma systems save lives by coordinating timely and effective responses to injury. However, trauma system effectiveness varies geographically, with worse outcomes observed in rural settings. Prior data suggest that undertriage may play a role in this disparity. Our aim was to explore potential driving factors for decision making among clinicians for undertriaged trauma patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the National Emergency Medical Services Information System database among patients who met physiologic or anatomic national field triage guideline criteria for transport to the highest level of trauma center. Undertriage was defined as transport to a non-level I/II trauma center. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine demographic, injury, and system characteristics associated with undertriage. Undertriaged patients were then categorized into "recognized" and "unrecognized" groups using the documented reason for transport destination to identify underlying factors associated with undertriage.

RESULTS

A total of 36,094 patients were analyzed. Patients in urban areas were more likely to be transported to a destination based on protocol rather than the closest available facility. As expected, patients injured in urban regions were less likely to be undertriaged than their suburban (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.69; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.21-3.31), rural (aOR, 2.71; 95% CI, 2.28-3.21), and wilderness counterparts (aOR, 3.99; 95% CI, 2.93-5.45). The strongest predictor of undertriage was patient/family choice (aOR, 6.29; 5.28-7.50), followed by closest facility (aOR, 5.49; 95% CI, 4.91-6.13) as the reason for hospital selection. Nonurban settings had over twice the odds of recognizing the presence of triage criteria among undertriaged patients ( p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with injuries in nonurban settings and those with less apparent causes of severe injury are more likely to experience undertriage. By analyzing how prehospital clinicians choose transport destinations, we identified patient and system factors associated with undertriage. Targeting these at-risk demographics and contributing factors may help alleviate regional disparities in undertriage.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Adherence to national trauma triage criteria in Norway: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Norwegian hospitals employed individual trauma triage criteria until 2015 when nationwide criteria were implemented. There is a lack of empirical evidence regarding adherence to Norwegian national criteria for activation of the trauma team (NTrC) and the decision-making processes regarding trauma team activation (TTA) within Norwegian trauma hospitals. The objectives of this study were to investigate institutional adherence to the NTrC and to investigate similarities and differences in the decision-making process leading to TTA in Norwegian trauma hospitals.

METHODS

A digital semi-structured questionnaire regarding adherence to criteria, TTA decision-making and criteria documentation was distributed to all Norwegian trauma hospitals (n = 38) in the spring of 2022. Contact details of trauma coordinators and registrars were provided by the Norwegian Trauma Registry secretariat. Follow-up telephone interviews were conducted at the investigator's discretion in cases of non-respondents or need to clarify answers.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight trauma hospitals were invited to answer the survey, where 35 hospitals responded (92%), making 35 the denominator of the results. Thirty-four (97.1%) hospitals stated that they followed NTrC. Thirty-three (94.3%) of the responding hospitals provided documentation of their criteria in use, of which twenty-eight (80%) of responding hospitals adhered to the NTrC. Three (8.6%) hospitals employed a tiered TTA approach with different sized teams. In addition four hospitals (11.4%) used specialized teams to meet the needs of defined patient groups (e.g. geriatric patients, traumatic brain injury). Twenty-one (60%) of the responding hospitals had written guidelines on who could perform TTA and in 18 hospitals (51.4%) TTA could be performed by pre-hospital personnel. Twenty-three (65.7%) of the hospitals documented which criteria that were used for TTA.

CONCLUSION

There is good adherence to the national criteria for activation of the trauma team among Norwegian trauma hospitals after implementation of national guidelines. Individual hospitals argue the use of certain local criteria and trauma team activation decision-making processes to increase their precision in specific patient populations and demographics. Further steps should be done to reduce the variation in TTA decision-making processes among hospitals and improve documentation quality.

'Endless variation on a theme': a document analysis of international and UK major trauma triage tools

Introduction

Triage tools are used within trauma networks to identify which injured patients should be bypassed and pre-alerted to major trauma centres. Despite the importance of treating the 'right patient in the right place at the right time', there has been no consensus on triage tool structure or content. This study aimed to identify, collate, review, summarise and recognise patterns across established major trauma triage tools.

Methods

UK and international triage tools used between 2012 and 2021 were identified through literature review and correspondence with trauma networks. A conceptual content analysis was then undertaken using an inductive codebook, comprising concepts of triage tool structure, intended population, inclusion criteria and included variables and thresholds. Thematic analysis was also performed to identify higher-level patterns within the data, with emerging patterns becoming categories for analysis. A narrative synthesis of findings was then undertaken.

Results

In total, 53 major trauma tools were identified, comprising 19 UK tools and 35 published international tools. Most triage tools (n = 42/53, 80%) were developed by expert opinion, were paper based and shared a common structure of multiple domains, with constituent triage predictors assessed in parallel. A minority of tools were statistically derived prediction models, operationalised either as simple scores (n = 10, 19%) or as an electronic application (n = 1, 1%). Overall, 173 distinct triage variables were used, with the median number of constituent triage variables per triage tool being 19 (range 3-31). Four distinct patterns of triage tools were identified during thematic analysis, which differed in terms of format, number of triage variables, thresholds, scope for clinical judgement and relative diagnostic accuracy.

Conclusion

Many diverse major trauma triage tools were identified, with no consensus in format, structure or content. Quantification of constituent variables and identification of distinct categories of triage tools may guide the design of future triage tools.

Identifying prehospital trauma patients from ambulance patient care records; comparing two methods using linked data in New South Wales, Australia

BACKGROUND

Linked datasets for trauma system monitoring should ideally follow patients from the prehospital scene to hospital admission and post-discharge. Having a well-defined cohort when using administrative datasets is essential because they must capture the representative population. Unlike hospital electronic health records (EHR), ambulance patient-care records lack access to sources beyond immediate clinical notes. Relying on a limited set of variables to define a study population might result in missed patient inclusion. We aimed to compare two methods of identifying prehospital trauma patients: one using only those documented under a trauma protocol and another incorporating additional data elements from ambulance patient care records.

METHODS

We analyzed data from six routinely collected administrative datasets from 2015 to 2018, including ambulance patient-care records, aeromedical data, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, rehabilitation outcomes, and death records. Three prehospital trauma cohorts were created: an Extended-T-protocol cohort (patients transported under a trauma protocol and/or patients with prespecified criteria from structured data fields), T-protocol cohort (only patients documented as transported under a trauma protocol) and non-T-protocol (extended-T-protocol population not in the T-protocol cohort). Patient-encounter characteristics, mortality, clinical and post-hospital discharge outcomes were compared. A conservative p-value of 0.01 was considered significant RESULTS: Of 1 038 263 patient-encounters included in the extended-T-population 814 729 (78.5 %) were transported, with 438 893 (53.9 %) documented as a T-protocol patient. Half (49.6 %) of the non-T-protocol sub-cohort had an International Classification of Disease 10th edition injury or external cause code, indicating 79644 missed patients when a T-protocol-only definition was used. The non-T-protocol sub-cohort also identified additional patients with intubation, prehospital blood transfusion and positive eFAST. A higher proportion of non-T protocol patients than T-protocol patients were admitted to the ICU (4.6% vs 3.6 %), ventilated (1.8% vs 1.3 %), received in-hospital transfusion (7.9 vs 6.8 %) or died (1.8% vs 1.3 %). Urgent trauma surgery was similar between groups (1.3% vs 1.4 %).

CONCLUSION

The extended-T-population definition identified 50 % more admitted patients with an ICD-10-AM code consistent with an injury, including patients with severe trauma. Developing an EHR phenotype incorporating multiple data fields of ambulance-transported trauma patients for use with linked data may avoid missing these patients.

Major Trauma Triage Tool Study (MATTS) expert consensus-derived injury assessment tool

Introduction

Major trauma centre (MTC) care has been associated with improved outcomes for injured patients. English ambulance services and trauma networks currently use a range of triage tools to select patients for bypass to MTCs. A standardised national triage tool may improve triage accuracy, cost-effectiveness and the reproducibility of decision-making.

Methods

We conducted an expert consensus process to derive and develop a major trauma triage tool for use in English trauma networks. A web-based Delphi survey was conducted to identify and confirm candidate triage tool predictors of major trauma. Facilitated roundtable consensus meetings were convened to confirm the proposed triage tool's purpose, target diagnostic threshold, scope, intended population and structure, as well as the individual triage tool predictors and cut points. Public and patient involvement (PPI) focus groups were held to ensure triage tool acceptability to service users.

Results

The Delphi survey reached consensus on nine triage variables in two domains, from 109 candidate variables after three rounds. Following a review of the relevant evidence during the consensus meetings, iterative rounds of discussion achieved consensus on the following aspects of the triage tool: reference standard, scope, target diagnostic accuracy and intended population. A three-step tool comprising physiology, anatomical injury and clinical judgement domains, with triage variables assessed in parallel, was recommended. The triage tool was received favourably by PPI focus groups.

Conclusions

This paper presents a new expert consensus derived major trauma triage tool with defined purpose, scope, intended population, structure, constituent variables, variable definitions and thresholds. Prospective evaluation is required to determine clinical and cost-effectiveness, acceptability and usability.

The accuracy of prehospital triage decisions in English trauma networks - a case-cohort study

BACKGROUND

Care for injured patients in England is provided by inclusive regional trauma networks. Ambulance services use triage tools to identify patients with major trauma who would benefit from expedited Major Trauma Centre (MTC) care. However, there has been no investigation of triage performance, despite its role in ensuring effective and efficient MTC care. This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of prehospital major trauma triage in representative English trauma networks.

METHODS

A diagnostic case-cohort study was performed between November 2019 and February 2020 in 4 English regional trauma networks as part of the Major Trauma Triage Study (MATTS). Consecutive patients with acute injury presenting to participating ambulance services were included, together with all reference standard positive cases, and matched to data from the English national major trauma database. The index test was prehospital provider triage decision making, with a positive result defined as patient transport with a pre-alert call to the MTC. The primary reference standard was a consensus definition of serious injury that would benefit from expedited major trauma centre care. Secondary analyses explored different reference standards and compared theoretical triage tool accuracy to real-life triage decisions.

RESULTS

The complete-case case-cohort sample consisted of 2,757 patients, including 959 primary reference standard positive patients. The prevalence of major trauma meeting the primary reference standard definition was 3.1% (n=54/1,722, 95% CI 2.3 - 4.0). Observed prehospital provider triage decisions demonstrated overall sensitivity of 46.7% (n=446/959, 95% CI 43.5-49.9) and specificity of 94.5% (n=1,703/1,798, 95% CI 93.4-95.6) for the primary reference standard. There was a clear trend of decreasing sensitivity and increasing specificity from younger to older age groups. Prehospital provider triage decisions commonly differed from the theoretical triage tool result, with ambulance service clinician judgement resulting in higher specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

Prehospital decision making for injured patients in English trauma networks demonstrated high specificity and low sensitivity, consistent with the targets for cost-effective triage defined in previous economic evaluations. Actual triage decisions differed from theoretical triage tool results, with a decreasing sensitivity and increasing specificity from younger to older ages.

Review article: Pre-hospital trauma guidelines and access to lifesaving interventions in Australia and Aotearoa/New Zealand

The centralisation of trauma services in western countries has led to an improvement in patient outcomes. Effective trauma systems include a pre-hospital trauma system. Delivery of high-level pre-hospital trauma care must include identification of potential major trauma patients, access and correct application of lifesaving interventions (LSIs) and timely transport to definitive care. Globally, many nations endorse nationwide pre-hospital major trauma triage guidelines, to ensure a universal approach to patient care. This paper examined clinical guidelines from all 10 EMS in Australia and Aotearoa/New Zealand. All relevant trauma guidelines were included, and key information was extracted. Authors compared major trauma triage criteria, all LSI included in guidelines, and guidelines for transport to definitive care. The identification of major trauma patients varied between all 10 EMS, with no universal criteria. The most common approach to trauma triage included a three-step assessment process: physiological criteria, identified injuries and mechanism of injury. Disparity between physiological criteria, injuries and mechanism was found when comparing guidelines. All 10 EMS had fundamental LSI included in their trauma guidelines. Fundamental LSI included haemorrhage control (arterial tourniquets, pelvic binders), non-invasive airway management (face mask ventilation, supraglottic airway devices) and pleural wall needle decompression. Variation in more advanced LSI was evident between EMS. Optimising trauma triage guidelines is an important aspect of a robust and evidence driven trauma system. The lack of consensus in trauma triage identified in the present study makes benchmarking and comparison of trauma systems difficult.

Modified Needleman-Wunsch algorithm for trauma management performance evaluation

BACKGROUND

Trauma injuries are one of the leading causes of death in the world, representing approximately 8 % of all deaths. Therefore, trauma management training is of great importance and new training courses have arisen during the last decades. However, actual training courses do not typically analyze compliance with the protocols and guidelines available in the literature. Considering general trauma management guidelines such as the Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) manual and the expertise of trauma specialists, a trauma management automated evaluation system has been designed in this paper.

METHODS

A modification to the Needleman-Wunsch (NW) algorithm is developed, including all relevant aspects of trauma management to automatically evaluate how a trauma intervention has been implemented according to trauma protocols. This allows to consider more information with respect to the order of the actions taken and the type of actions performed than current evaluation methods, such as checklists or videos recorded in simulation. A web-based trauma simulator is used so that it can be used at any setting with internet connection. Final-year medical students and first- and second-year residents performed an experimental test, where a trauma score is obtained with the modified NW algorithm. This automatic score relates to how similar the actions are to trauma protocols.

RESULTS

The results show the best combination of the scores used for the modified NW variables. This combination has an error, for the different case scenarios created, below 0.07 which verifies the values obtained. Additionally, trauma experts verified the results obtained showing a median difference of 0 between the protocol adherence evaluation using the algorithm and the one provided by the trauma experts.

CONCLUSIONS

The best set of score values to apply to the modified NW algorithm show that the modified NW algorithm provides a successful objective measurement with respect to the protocol compliance.

Implementation of a major trauma team. Analysis of activation and care times in patients admitted to the ICU

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the factors associated with the activation of the severe trauma care team (STAT) in patients admitted to the ICU, to measure its impact on care times, and to analyze the groups of patients according to activation and level of anatomical involvement.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study of severe trauma admitted to the ICU. From June 2017 to May 2019. Risk factors for the activation of the STAT analysed with logistic regression and CART type classification tree.

SETTING

Second level hospital ICU.

PATIENTS

Patients admitted consecutively.

INTERVENTIONS

No.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

STAT activation. Demographic variables. Injury severity (ISS), intentionality, mechanism, assistance times, evolutionary complications, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 188 patients were admitted (46.8% of STAT activation), median age of 52 (37-64) years (activated 47 (27-62) vs not activated 55 (42-67) P = 0.023), males 84.0%. No difference in mortality according to activation. The logistic model finds as factors: care (16.6 (2.1-13.2)) and prehospital intubation (4.2 (1.8-9.8)) and severe lower extremity injury (4.4 (1.6-12.3)). Accidental fall (0.2 (0.1-0.6)) makes activation less likely. The CART model selects the type of trauma mechanism and can separate high and low energy trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors associated with STAT activation were prehospital care, requiring prior intubation, high-energy mechanisms, and severe lower extremity injuries. Shorter care times if activated without influencing mortality. We must improve activation in older patients with low-energy trauma and without prehospital care.

The Ability of Emergency Medical Service Staff to Predict Emergency Department Disposition: A Prospective Study

Purpose

Paramedics' decision to notify receiving hospitals and transport patients to an appropriate healthcare facility is based on the Prediction of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and Hospital Admissions guide. This study aimed to assess the paramedics' gestalt on both ward and ICU admission.

Patients and Methods

A prospective study was conducted at King Abdulaziz Medical City between September 2021 and March 2022. Paramedics were asked several questions related to the prediction of the patient's hospital outcome, including emergency department (ED) discharge or hospital admission (ICU or ward). Additional data, such as the time of the ambulance's arrival and the staff years of experience, were collected. The categorical characteristics are presented by frequency and percentage for each category.

Results

This study included 251 paramedics and 251 patients. The average age of the patients was 62 years. Of the patients, 32 (12.7%) were trauma, and 219 (87.3%) were non-trauma patients. Two-thirds of the patients (n=171, 68.1%) were predicted to be admitted to the hospital, and 80 (31.8%) of the EMS staff indicated that the patient do not need a hospital or an ambulance. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the emergency medical service (EMS) staffs' gestalt for patient admission to the hospital were, respectively (77%), (33%), (16%), and (90%). Further analysis was reported to defend the EMS staffs' gestalt based on the level of EMS staff and the nature of the emergency (medical vs trauma), are reported.

Conclusion

Our study reports a low level of accurately predicting patient admission to the hospital, including the ICU. The results of this study have important implications for enhancing the accuracy of EMS staff predictive ability and ensuring that patients receive appropriate care promptly.

Comparing health status after major trauma across different levels of trauma care

INTRODUCTION

Mortality due to trauma has reduced the past decades. Trauma network implementations have been an important contributor to this achievement. Besides mortality, patient reported outcome parameters should be included in evaluation of trauma care. While concentrating major trauma care, hospitals are designated with a certain level of trauma care following specific criteria.

OBJECTIVE

Comparing health status of major trauma patients after two years across different levels of trauma care in trauma networks.

METHODS

Multicentre observational study comprising a secondary longitudinal multilevel analysis on prospective cohorts from two neighbouring trauma regions in the Netherlands.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

patient aged ≥ 18 with an ISS > 15 surviving their injuries at least one year after trauma. Health status was measured one and two years after trauma by EQ-5D-5 L, added with a sixth health dimension on cognition. Level I trauma centres were considered as reference in uni- and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Respondents admitted to a level I trauma centre scored less favourable EQ-US and EQ-VAS in both years (0.81-0.81, 71-75) than respondents admitted to a level II (0.88-0.87, 78-85) or level III (0.89-0.88, 75-80) facility. Level II facilities scored significantly higher EQ-US and EQ-VAS in time for univariate analysis (β 0.095, 95% CI 0.038-0.153, p = 0.001, and β 7.887, 95% CI 3.035-12.740, p = 0.002), not in multivariate analysis (β 0.052, 95% CI -0.010-0.115, p = 0.102, and β 3.714, 95% CI -1.893-9.321, p = 0.193). Fewer limitations in mobility (OR 0.344, 95% CI 0.156-0.760), self-care (OR 0.219, 95% CI 0.077-0.618), and pain and discomfort (OR 0.421, 95% CI 0.214-0.831) remained significant for level II facilities in multivariate analysis, whereas significant differences with level III facilities disappeared.

CONCLUSION

Major trauma patients admitted to level I trauma centres reported a less favourable general health status and more limitations compared to level II and III facilities scoring populations norms one to two years after trauma. Differences on general health status and limitations in specific health domains disappeared in adjusted analysis. Well-coordinated trauma networks offer homogeneous results for all major trauma patients when they are distributed in different centres according to their need of care.

Is prehospital intubation of severely injured children in accordance with guidelines?

BACKGROUND

The current German S3 guideline for polytrauma lists five criteria for prehospital intubation: apnea, severe traumatic brain injury (GCS ≤8), severe chest trauma with respiratory failure, hypoxia, and persistent hemodynamic instability. These guideline criteria, used in adults in daily practice, have not been previously studied in a collection of severely injured children. The aim of this study was to assess the extent to which the criteria are implemented in clinical practice using a multivariate risk analysis of severely injured children.

METHODS

Data of 289,698 patients from the TraumaRegister DGU® were analyzed. Children meeting the following criteria were included: Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale 3+, primary admission, German-speaking countries, years 2008-2017, and declaration of intubation. Since children show age-dependent deviating physiology, four age groups were defined (years old: 0-2; 3-6; 7-11; 12-15). An adult collective served as a control group (age: 20-50). After a descriptive analysis in the first step, factors leading to prehospital intubation in severely injured children were analyzed with a multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 4489 children met the inclusion criteria. In this cohort, young children up to 2 years old had the significantly highest injury severity (Injury Severity Score: 21; p ≤ 0.001). Falls from both high (> 3 m) and low heights (< 3 m) were more common in children than in adults. The same finding applied to the occurrence of severe traumatic brain injury. When at least one intubation criterion was formally present, the group up to 6 years old was least likely to actually be intubated (61.4%; p ≤ 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis showed that Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤ 8 in particular had the greatest influence on intubation (odds ratio: 26.9; p ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The data presented here show for the first time that the existing criteria in the guideline for prehospital intubation are applied in clinical practice (approximately 70% of cases), compared to adults, in the vast majority of injured children. Although severely injured children still represent a minority of all injured patients, future guidelines should focus more on them and address them in a specialized manner.

The Need for Trauma Management Training and Evaluation on a Prehospital Setting

Trauma is one of the leading causes of death in the world, being the main cause of death in people under 45 years old. The epidemiology of these deaths shows an important peak during the first hour after a traumatic event. Therefore, learning how to manage traumatic injuries in a prehospital setting is of great importance. Medical students from Universidad Autónoma performed 66 different simulations to stabilize a trauma patient on a prehospital scene by using a web-based trauma simulator. Then, a panel of trauma experts evaluated the simulations performed, observing that, on average, an important number of simulations were scored below 5, being the score values provided from 0, minimum, to 10, maximum. Therefore, the first need detected is the need to further train prehospital trauma management in undergraduate education. Additionally, a deeper analysis of the scores provided by the experts was performed. It showed a great dispersion in the scores provided by the different trauma experts per simulation. Therefore, a second need is identified, the need to develop a system to objectively evaluate trauma management.

National guideline for the field triage of injured patients: Recommendations of the National Expert Panel on Field Triage, 2021

This work details the process of developing the updated field triage guideline, the supporting evidence, and the final version of the 2021 National Guideline for the Field Triage of Injured Patients.

Need for Emergent Intervention within 6 Hours: A Novel Prediction Model for Hospital Trauma Triage

Objective: A tiered trauma team activation system allocates resources proportional to patients' needs based upon injury burden. Previous trauma hospital-triage models are limited to predicting Injury Severity Score which is based on > 10% all-cause in-hospital mortality, rather than need for emergent intervention within 6 hours (NEI-6). Our aim was to develop a novel prediction model for hospital-triage that utilizes criteria available to the EMS provider to predict NEI-6 and the need for a trauma team activation.Methods: A regional trauma quality collaborative was used to identify all trauma patients ≥ 16 years from the American College of Surgeons-Committee on Trauma verified Level 1 and 2 trauma centers. Logistic regression and random forest were used to construct two predictive models for NEI-6 based on clinically relevant variables. Restricted cubic splines were used to model nonlinear predictors. The accuracy of the prediction model was assessed in terms of discrimination.Results: Using data from 12,624 patients for the training dataset (62.6% male; median age 61 years; median ISS 9) and 9,445 patients for the validation dataset (62.6% male; median age 59 years; median ISS 9), the following significant predictors were selected for the prediction models: age, gender, field GCS, vital signs, intentionality, and mechanism of injury. The final boosted tree model showed an AUC of 0.85 in the validation cohort for predicting NEI-6.Conclusions: The NEI-6 trauma triage prediction model used prehospital metrics to predict need for highest level of trauma activation. Prehospital prediction of major trauma may reduce undertriage mortality and improve resource utilization.

The diagnostic accuracy of prehospital triage tools in identifying patients with traumatic brain injury: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Prehospital care providers are usually the first responders for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Early identification of patients with TBI enables them to receive trauma centre care, which improves outcomes. Two recent systematic reviews concluded that prehospital triage tools for undifferentiated major trauma have low accuracy. However, neither review focused specifically on patients with suspected TBI. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review the existing evidence on the diagnostic performance of prehospital triage tools for patients with suspected TBI.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the current literature was conducted using Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus and the Cochrane library (inception to 1st June 2021). We also searched Google Scholar, OpenGrey, pre-prints (MedRxiv) and dissertation databases. We included all studies published in English language evaluating the accuracy of prehospital triage tools for TBI. We assessed methodological quality and risk of bias using a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Two reviewers independently performed searches, screened titles and abstracts and undertook methodological quality assessments. Due to the heterogeneity in the population of interest and prehospital triage tools used, a narrative synthesis was undertaken.

RESULTS

The initial search identified 1787 articles, of which 8 unique eligible studies met the inclusion criteria (5 retrospective, 2 prospective, 1 mixed). Overall, sensitivity of triage tools studied ranged from 19.8% to 87.9% for TBI identification. Specificity ranged from 41.4% to 94.4%. Two decision tools have been validated more than once: HITS-NS (2 studies, sensitivity 28.3-32.6%, specificity 89.1-94.4%) and the Field Triage Decision Scheme (4 studies, sensitivity 19.8-64.5%, specificity 77.4%-93.1%). Existing tools appear to systematically under-triage older patients.

CONCLUSION

Further efforts are needed to improve and optimise prehospital triage tools. Consideration of additional predictors (e.g., biomarkers, clinical decision aids and paramedic judgement) may be required to improve diagnostic accuracy.

Prehospital triage tools across the world: a scoping review of the published literature

BACKGROUND

Accurate triage of the undifferentiated patient is a critical task in prehospital emergency care. However, there is a paucity of literature synthesizing currently available prehospital triage tools. This scoping review aims to identify published tools used for prehospital triage globally and describe their performance characteristics.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed of primary literature in English-language journals from 2009 to 2019. Papers included focused on emergency medical services (EMS) triage of single patients. Two blinded reviewers and a third adjudicator performed independent title and abstract screening and subsequent full-text reviews.

RESULTS

Of 1521 unique articles, 55 (3.6%) were included in the final synthesis. The majority of prehospital triage tools focused on stroke (n = 19; 35%), trauma (19; 35%), and general undifferentiated patients (15; 27%). All studies were performed in high income countries, with the majority in North America (23, 42%) and Europe (22, 40%). 4 (7%) articles focused on the pediatric population. General triage tools aggregate prehospital vital signs, mental status assessments, history, exam, and anticipated resource need, to categorize patients by level of acuity. Studies assessed the tools' ability to accurately predict emergency department triage assignment, hospitalization and short-term mortality. Stroke triage tools promote rapid identification of patients with acute large vessel occlusion ischemic stroke to trigger timely transport to diagnostically- and therapeutically-capable hospitals. Studies evaluated tools' diagnostic performance, impact on tissue plasminogen activator administration rates, and correlation with in-hospital stroke scales. Trauma triage tools identify patients that require immediate transport to trauma centers with emergency surgery capability. Studies evaluated tools' prediction of trauma center need, under-triage and over-triage rates for major trauma, and survival to discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

The published literature on prehospital triage tools predominantly derive from high-income health systems and mostly focus on adult stroke and trauma populations. Most studies sought to further simplify existing triage tools without sacrificing triage accuracy, or assessed the predictive capability of the triage tool. There was no clear 'gold-standard' singular prehospital triage tool for acute undifferentiated patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

Pre-hospital trauma triage: Outcomes of interfacility transferred trauma patients meeting pre-hospital triage criteria

Introduction

In Ontario, Canada, paramedics use the Field Trauma Triage Standard to identify patients at risk for severe injury. These triage criteria encompass physiologic, anatomic, mechanism of injury, and special considerations to identify patients that should be transported directly to a trauma center. Patients meeting any one of these criteria mandate direct transfer to a trauma center. This study evaluated whether severely injured trauma patients that underwent an interfacility transfer met these triage criteria. The secondary objective was to assess the impact of failed triage application on in-hospital mortality.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of interfacility trauma transfers to an adult trauma center over a 3-year period that were either admitted to the intensive care unit, received an operation within 4 h of arrival, or died within 48 h of arrival. Data were abstracted from the hospital’s trauma registry and chart review of electronic medical records. Frequency of patients meeting pre-hospital triage criteria and which specific criteria were collected. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the impact of missed pre-hospital triage on in-hospital mortality.

Results

There were 1008 interfacility patients during the study period, of which 340 patients met inclusion criteria; 78.5% ( n = 267) of interfacility transports had met at least one triage criteria. Most frequent criteria met were: Glasgow Coma Scale <14 (42.4%), high risk motor-vehicle collision (22.1%), and systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg (19.4%). When adjusted for injury severity score and age, patients who met triage criteria were not at increased odds of death (OR 2.38, 95% CI: 0.87–6.46) compared to interfacility patients that did not meet criteria. Conclusion: A majority of critically injured interfacility transfers met initial trauma triage criteria. These patients are at high risk for preventable morbidity and mortality. This study indicates the need to understand the barriers to pre-hospital adherence to trauma triage guidelines.

Individual risk factors predictive of major trauma in pre-hospital injured older patients: a systematic review

Background

Older adults with major trauma are frequently under-triaged, increasing the risk of preventable morbidity and mortality. The aim of this systematic review was to identify which individual risk factors and predictors are likely to increase the risk of major trauma in elderly patients presenting to emergency medical services (EMS) following injury, to inform future elderly triage tool development.

Methods

Several electronic databases (including Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library) were searched from inception to February 2021. Prospective or retrospective diagnostic studies were eligible if they examined a prognostic factor (often termed predictor or risk factor) for, or diagnostic test to identify, major trauma. Selection of studies, data extraction and risk of bias assessments using the Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool were undertaken independently by at least two reviewers. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the findings.

Results

Nine studies, all performed in US trauma networks, met review inclusion criteria. Vital signs (Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate and shock index with specific elderly cut-off points), EMS provider judgement, comorbidities and certain crash scene variables (other occupants injured, occupant not independently mobile and head-on collision) were identified as significant pre-hospital variables associated with major trauma in the elderly in multi-variable analyses. Heart rate and anticoagulant were not significant predictors. Included studies were at moderate or high risk of bias, with applicability concerns secondary to selected study populations.

Conclusions

Existing pre-hospital major trauma triage tools could be optimised for elderly patients by including elderly-specific physiology thresholds. Future work should focus on more relevant reference standards and further evaluation of novel elderly relevant triage tool variables and thresholds.

Field Trauma Triage among Older Adults: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

National guidelines for prehospital trauma triage aim to identify seriously injured patients who may benefit from transport to trauma centers. These guidelines have poor sensitivity for serious injury among older adults. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a high-sensitivity triage strategy for older adults.

STUDY DESIGN

We developed a Markov chain Monte Carlo microsimulation model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of high-sensitivity field triage criteria among older adults compared with current practice. The model used a retrospective cohort of 3621 community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries who were transported by emergency medical services after an acute injury in 7 counties in the northwestern US during January to December 2011. These data informed model estimates of emergency medical services triage assessment, hospital transport patterns, and outcomes from index hospitalization up to 1 year after discharge. Outcomes beyond 1 year were modeled using published literature. Differences in cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated for both strategies using a lifetime analytical horizon. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per QALY gained) to assess cost-effectiveness, which we defined using a threshold of less than $100,000 per QALY.

RESULTS

High-sensitivity trauma field triage for older adults would produce a small incremental benefit in average trauma system effectiveness (0.0003 QALY) per patient at a cost of $1,236,295 per QALY. Sensitivity analysis indicates that the cost of initial hospitalization and emergency medical services adherence to triage status (ie transporting triage-positive patients to a trauma center) had the largest influence on overall cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

High-sensitivity trauma field triage is not cost-effective among older adults.

Evaluation of elderly specific pre-hospital trauma triage criteria: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pre-hospital identification of major trauma in elderly patients is key for delivery of optimal care, however triage of this group is challenging. Elderly-specific triage criteria may be valuable. This systematic review aimed to summarise the published pre-hospital elderly-specific trauma triage tools and evaluate their sensitivity and specificity and associated clinical outcomes.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched using predetermined criteria (PROSPERO: CRD42019140879). Two authors independently assessed search results, performed data extraction, risk of bias and quality assessments following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

RESULTS

801 articles were screened and 11 studies met eligibility criteria, including 1,332,300 patients from exclusively USA populations. There were eight unique elderly-specific triage criteria reported. Most studies retrospectively applied criteria to trauma databases, with few reporting real-world application. The Ohio Geriatric Triage Criteria was reported in three studies. Age cut-off ranged from 55 to 70 years with ≥ 65 most frequently reported. All reported existing adult criteria with modified physiological parameters using higher thresholds for systolic blood pressure and Glasgow coma scale, although the values used varied. Three criteria added co-morbidity or anti-coagulant/anti-platelet use considerations. Modifications to anatomical or mechanism of injury factors were used by only one triage criteria. Criteria sensitivity ranged from 44 to 93%, with a median of 86.3%, whilst specificity was generally poor (median 54%). Scant real-world data showed an increase in patients meeting triage criteria, but minimal changes to patient transport destination and mortality. All studies were at risk of bias and assessed of "very low" or "low" quality.

CONCLUSIONS

There are several published elderly-specific pre-hospital trauma triage tools in clinical practice, all developed and employed in the USA. Consensus exists for higher thresholds for physiological parameters, however there was variability in age-cut offs, triage criteria content, and tool sensitivity and specificity. Although sensitivity was improved over corresponding 'adult' criteria, specificity remained poor. There is a paucity of published real-world data examining the effect on patient care and clinical outcomes of elderly-specific triage criteria. There is uncertainty over the optimal elderly triage tool and further study is required to better inform practice and improve patient outcomes.

Under-triage of older trauma patients in prehospital care: a systematic review

Aim

The systematic review aimed to assess the under-triage rate for older trauma patients in prehospital care and its impact on their outcomes.

Findings

Older trauma patients were significantly under-triaged in prehospital care and the benefits of triaging these patients to Tauma Centres (TCs) are still uncertain. Current triage criteria and developed geriatric-specific criteria lacked acceptable accuracy and when patients met the criteria, they had a low chance of being transported to TCs.

Message

Future worldwide research is needed to assess the following aspects: (1) the accuracy of current trauma triage criteria, (2) developing more accurate triage criteria, (3) destination compliance rates for patients meeting the triage criteria, (4) factors leading to destination non-compliance and their impact on outcomes, and (5) the benefits of TC access for older trauma patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41999-021-00512-5.

Background

It is argued that many older trauma patients are under-triaged in prehospital care which may adversely affect their outcomes. This systematic review aimed to assess prehospital under-triage rates for older trauma patients, the accuracy of the triage criteria, and the impact of prehospital triage decisions on outcomes.

Methods

A computerised literature search using MEDLINE, Scopus, and CINHAL databases was conducted for studies published between 1966 and 2021 using a list of predetermined index terms and their associated alternatives. Studies which met the inclusion criteria were included and critiqued using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. Due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, narrative synthesis was used in this systematic review.

Results

Of the 280 identified studies, 23 met the inclusion criteria. Current trauma triage guidelines have poor sensitivity to identify major trauma and the need for TC care for older adults. Although modified triage tools for this population have improved sensitivity, they showed significantly decreased specificity or were not applied to all older people. The issue of low rates of TC transport for positively triaged older patients is not well understood. Furthermore, the benefits of TC treatment for older patients remain uncertain.

Conclusions

This systematic review showed that under-triage is an ongoing issue for older trauma patients in prehospital care and its impact on their outcomes is still uncertain. Further high-quality prospective research is needed to assess the accuracy of prehospital triage criteria, the factors other than the triage criteria that affect transport decisions, and the impact of under-triage on outcomes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41999-021-00512-5.

Field-Triage, Hospital-Triage and Triage-Assessment: A Literature Review of the Current Phases of Adult Trauma Triage

ABSTRACT

Despite major improvements in the United States trauma system over the past two decades, prehospital trauma triage is a significant challenge. Undertriage is associated with increased mortality, and overtriage results in significant resource overuse. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma benchmarks for undertriage and overtriage are not being met. Many barriers to appropriate field triage exist, including lack of a formal definition for major trauma, absence of a simple and widely applicable triage mode, and emergency medical service adherence to triage protocols. Modern trauma triage systems should ideally be based on the need for intervention rather than injury severity. Future studies should focus on identifying the ideal definition for major trauma and creating triage models that can be easily deployed. This narrative review article presents challenges and potential solutions for prehospital trauma triage.

Head injury assessment in rugby union: clinical judgement guidelines

Background/aim

Clinical judgement is a recognised component of a complete off-field concussion assessment. This study identifies guidance criteria for team medical staff when using clinical judgement in their decision-making process during the World Rugby off-field concussion-assessment screen (HIA1).

Methods

Retrospective study of examining doctor clinical judgement in 1149 HIA1 assessments after a meaningful head impact event completed on rugby union players participating in elite-level international and national competitions between September 2015 and June 2018. We assessed (1) an abnormal subtest result as worse performance compared with preseason baseline values; (2) the proportion of cases where clinicians overruled abnormal HIA1 assessment subtest results and (3) made recommendations on how clinical judgement decisions may be made more safely based on the accuracy of clinical judgement decisions assessed against the final concussion diagnosis.

Results

One or more subtests were abnormal compared with baseline values in 857 of 1149 HIA1 assessments. Clinical judgement was used to return players to the game despite abnormal subtest results on 424 out of 857 occasions (49%). In a significant majority of cases 356/424 (84%), clinical judgement decisions were correct, with players later cleared of a concussion. An application of guided clinical judgement potentially decreased false negative assessments by 33% (21/63).

Conclusions

Clinical judgement should be applied in the diagnosis of concussion but done so cautiously. We propose doctors should only use clinical judgement to overrule either one of; or a combination of (1) an abnormal tandem gait and (2) one abnormal cognitive test.

New Horizons in Understanding Appropriate Prehospital Identification and Trauma Triage for Older Adults

Caring for older people is an important part of prehospital practice, including appropriate triage and transportation decisions. However, prehospital triage criteria are designed to predominantly assess injury severity or high-energy mechanism which is not the case for older people who often have injuries compounded by multimorbidity and frailty. This has led to high rates of under-triage in this population. This narrative review aimed to assess aspects other than triage criteria to better understand and improve prehospital triage decisions for older trauma patients. This includes integrating frailty assessment in prehospital trauma triage, which was shown to predict adverse outcomes for older trauma patients. Furthermore, determining appropriate outcome measures and the benefits of Major Trauma Centers (MTCs) for older trauma patients should be considered in order to direct accurate and more beneficial prehospital trauma triage decisions. It is still not clear what are the appropriate outcome measures that should be applied when caring for older trauma patients. There is also no strong consensus about the benefits of MTC access for older trauma patients with regards to survival, in-hospital length of stay, discharge disposition, and complications. Moreover, looking into factors other than triage criteria such as distance to MTCs, patient or relative choice, training, unfamiliarity with protocols, and possible ageism, which were shown to impact prehospital triage decisions but their impact on outcomes has not been investigated yet, should be more actively assessed and investigated for this population. Therefore, this paper aimed to discuss the available evidence around frailty assessment in prehospital care, appropriate outcome measures for older trauma patients, the benefits of MTC access for older patients, and factors other than triage criteria that could adversely impact accurate prehospital triage decisions for older trauma patients. It also provided several suggestions for the future.

Diagnostic accuracy of prehospital triage tools for identifying major trauma in elderly injured patients: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Older adults with major trauma are frequently undertriaged, increasing the risk of preventable morbidity and mortality. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of prehospital triage tools to identify suspected elderly trauma patients in need of specialized trauma care.

METHODS

Several electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library) were searched from inception to February 2019. Prospective or retrospective diagnostic studies were eligible if they examined prehospital triage tools as index tests (either scored theoretically using observed patient variables or evaluated according to actual paramedic transport decisions) compared with a reference standard for major trauma in elderly adults who require transport by paramedics following injury. Selection of studies, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool were undertaken independently by at least two reviewers. Narrative synthesis was used to summarize the findings.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria, with 11 studies examining theoretical accuracy, three evaluating real-life transport decisions, and one assessing both (of 21 individual index tests). Estimates for sensitivity and specificity were highly variable with sensitivity estimates ranging from 19.8% to 95.5% and 57.7% to 83.3% for theoretical accuracy and real life triage performance, respectively. Specificity results were similarly diverse ranging from 17.0% to 93.1% for theoretical accuracy and 46.3% to 78.9% for actual paramedic decisions. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias and applicability concerns. There were no obvious differences between different triage tools, and findings did not appear to vary systematically with major trauma prevalence, age, alternative reference standards, study designs, or setting.

CONCLUSION

Existing prehospital triage tools may not accurately identify elderly patients with serious injury. Future work should focus on more relevant reference standards, establishing the best trade-off between undertriage and overtriage, optimizing the role prehospital clinician judgment, and further developing geriatric specific triage variables and thresholds.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review, level III.

Towards improving prehospital triage for older trauma patients

BACKGROUND

The proportion of older adults with major trauma is increasing. High-quality care for this population requires accurate and effective prehospital trauma triage decisions.

OBJECTIVE

Anatomical and physiological changes with age, comorbidities, and medication use for older adults may affect the accuracy of prehospital trauma triage.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This narrative review focusses on age-related anatomical and physiological changes, comorbidities, and medication use for older adults with an emphasis on their impact on the accuracy of prehospital trauma triage tools. It also addresses the efforts to develop alternative triage criteria to reduce undertriage.

RESULTS

Age-related anatomical and physiological changes, comorbidities, and medication use were shown to affect physiological responses to injury and mechanism of injury for older people. Current triage tools poorly predicted injury severity. Geriatric-specific physiological measures and comorbidities significantly improved sensitivity with much lower specificity. Assessing anticoagulant or antiplatelet use in head injury notably improved sensitivity to identify traumatic intracranial hemorrhage, neurosurgery or death with modest decrease in specificity.

CONCLUSION

Improving prehospital providers' knowledge about the challenges of assessing older people with trauma may reduce undertriage. Assessing frailty could help in improving prehospital providers' judgments. Future research is needed to improve triage decisions for this population.

Accuracy of National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) in Prehospital Triage on In-Hospital Early Mortality: A Multi-Center Observational Prospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

In cases of mass-casualty incidents (MCIs), triage represents a fundamental tool for the management of and assistance to the wounded, which helps discriminate not only the priority of attention, but also the priority of referral to the most suitable center.

HYPOTHESIS/PROBLEM

The objective of this study was to evaluate the capacity of different prehospital triage systems based on physiological parameters (Shock Index [SI], Glasgow-Age-Pressure Score [GAP], Revised Trauma Score [RTS], and National Early Warning Score 2 [NEWS2]) to predict early mortality (within 48 hours) from the index event for use in MCIs.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal prospective observational multi-center study on patients who were attended by Advanced Life Support (ALS) units and transferred to the emergency department (ED) of their reference hospital. Collected were: demographic, physiological, and clinical variables; main diagnosis; and data on early mortality. The main outcome variable was mortality from any cause within 48 hours.

RESULTS

From April 1, 2018 through February 28, 2019, a total of 1,288 patients were included in this study. Of these, 262 (20.3%) participants required assistance for trauma and injuries by external agents. Early mortality within the first 48 hours due to any cause affected 69 patients (5.4%). The system with the best predictive capacity was the NEWS2 with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.891 (95% CI, 0.84-0.94); a sensitivity of 79.7% (95% CI, 68.8-87.5); and a specificity of 84.5% (95% CI, 82.4-86.4) for a cut-off point of nine points, with a positive likelihood ratio of 5.14 (95% CI, 4.31-6.14) and a negative predictive value of 98.7% (95% CI, 97.8-99.2).

CONCLUSION

Prehospital scores of the NEWS2 are easy to obtain and represent a reliable test, which make it an ideal system to help in the initial assessment of high-risk patients, and to determine their level of triage effectively and efficiently. The Prehospital Emergency Medical System (PhEMS) should evaluate the inclusion of the NEWS2 as a triage system, which is especially useful for the second triage (evacuation priority).

Older age is associated with a reduced likelihood of ambulance transport to a trauma centre after major trauma in Perth

OBJECTIVE

To describe the characteristics and outcomes of older adult (≥65 years) major trauma patients in comparison with younger adults (16-64 years). To determine whether older age is associated with a reduced likelihood of transport (directly or indirectly) to a major trauma centre and whether this is associated with in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of major trauma patients transported to hospital by St John Ambulance paramedics in Perth, Western Australia, between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2016. Multivariate logistic regression was used to test the relationship between age and major trauma centre transport. Multivariate logistic regression analysis using inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to determine if major trauma centre transport was associated with in-hospital mortality in older adults.

RESULTS

One thousand six hundred and twenty-five patients were included; of these 576 (35%) were ≥65 years. In comparison with younger adults, older adults had more falls as their mechanism of injury (n = 358 [62%] versus n = 102 [10%], P ≤ 0.001) and more major head injuries (n = 472 [82%] versus n = 609 [58%], P ≤ 0.001). Older adults had lower odds (adjusted odds ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35-0.78) of major trauma centre transport and this was associated with 1.7 times the likelihood of in-hospital mortality (95% CI 1.04-2.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults who were not transported to the trauma centre had an increased odds of in-hospital mortality. However, older age was associated with a significantly reduced likelihood of trauma centre transport. With the aging population, the development of specific prehospital triage criteria to enable the complexities of this higher-risk population to be identified is important.

The role of emergency medical service providers in the decision-making process of prehospital trauma triage

PURPOSE

Severely injured patients should be treated at higher-level trauma centres, to improve chances of survival and avert life-long disabilities. Emergency medical service (EMS) providers must try to determine injury severity on-scene, using a prehospital trauma triage protocol, and decide the most appropriate type of trauma centre. The objective of this study is to investigate the role of EMS provider judgment in the prehospital triage process of trauma patients, by analysing the compliance rate to the protocol and administering a questionnaire among EMS providers.

METHODS

All trauma patients transported to a trauma centre in two different regions of the Netherlands were analysed. Compliance rate was based on the number of patients meeting the triage criteria and transported to the corresponding level trauma centre. The questionnaire was administered among EMS providers. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

For adult patients, the compliance rate to the level I criteria of the triage protocol was 72% in Central Netherlands and 42% in Brabant. For paediatric patients, this was 63% and 38% in Central Netherlands and Brabant, respectively. The judgment on injury severity was mostly based on the injury-type criteria. Additionally, the distance to a level I trauma centre influenced the decision for destination facility in the Brabant region.

CONCLUSION

The compliance rate varied between regions. Improvement of prehospital trauma triage depends on the accuracy of the protocol and compliance rate. A new protocol, including EMS provider judgment, might be the key to improvement in the prehospital trauma triage quality.