Proceedings from the Consensus Conference on Trauma Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

Quality of life and return to work rates in the first two years following major burn injury

BACKGROUND

A better understanding of how major burns patients recover following injury is vital in assessing trauma care and informing healthcare and rehabilitation provision. We aimed to describe the longer-term health and return to work status of major burns patients and identify factors associated with positive outcomes i.e., reporting no problems with health-related quality of life, returning to work).

METHODS

This registry-based cohort study included adult (≥ 16 years) patients with a burn injury affecting ≥ 20 % total body surface area registered by the Victorian State Trauma Registry with a date of injury from July 1 2009 to June 30 2022. Patients were followed-up at six, 12, and 24 months post-injury, completing the 3-level or 5-level EuroQoL 5 dimensions questionnaire (depending on their date of injury) and return to work-related questions at each time point. Mixed effect regression models were used to predict factors associated with quality of life outcomes. Modified binary Poisson models were used to model the probability of experiencing no problems in each of the quality of life domains, and mixed effects linear regression was used to model the overall utility score.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eighty-seven patients were included; 63 (21.9 %) did not die but were completely lost to follow-up. The prevalence of reporting no problems at 24 months post-injury was 70.2 % for mobility, 77.8 % for self-care, 48.0 % for usual activities, 49.7 % for pain or discomfort, and 51.5 % for anxiety or depression. The predicted probability of reporting no problems in each of the EQ-5D health states was lowest at six-months and increased over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of ongoing problems - particularly with usual activities, pain, and anxiety/depression - at 24 months post-injury is high, confirming that major burns are often an ongoing disorder. Greater investment in interventions designed to reduce these problems is needed.

Association of pre- and postinjury mental health with long-term clinical and financial outcomes

BACKGROUND

As increased attention is placed on optimizing long-term outcomes of trauma patients by addressing mental health, little is known regarding the interplay of pre- and postinjury mental health on long-term financial and functional outcomes.

METHODS

Patients from 19 Level 1 and 2 trauma centers took part in serial surveys 1 to 24 months postdischarge. Preinjury mental health diagnoses were identified using trauma registry data and postinjury mental health symptoms from survey data. Outcomes included (1) health-related quality of life from the EuroQol-5D-5L and (2) elements of financial toxicity (e.g. medical debt, job/income loss, nonmedical bills, unaffordable care). Multivariable models were created, adjusting for patient, injury, and treatment factors, to evaluate the association of preinjury mental health diagnoses and postinjury mental health symptoms on health-related quality of life and financial toxicity.

RESULTS

A total of 1,017 patients completed 1,297 surveys from July 2021 to December 2023, at a median of 6 months postinjury. Forty-six percent were female, the median age was 67.5 years, and 89% had blunt injuries. Thirty-two percent of patients had a preinjury mental health diagnosis, and 49% had self-reported mental health symptoms postdischarge. Patients with preinjury mental health diagnoses had higher odds of postinjury mental health symptoms (adjusted odds ratio, 3.6 [2.6-4.9]; p < 0.001); however, 55% of those with postinjury symptoms had no preinjury diagnosis. Postinjury symptoms alone were associated with worse health-related quality of life or financial toxicity. Notably, patients with new postinjury mental health symptoms (no preinjury mental health diagnosis) had the highest rate of foregone postinjury care because of costs (26% vs. 14%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

More than one-in-two patients had peri-injury mental health conditions, and patients with postinjury mental health symptoms experienced worse financial and functional outcomes. Addressing postinjury mental health may potentially improve long-term health-related quality of life of trauma survivors; however, efforts are needed to ensure that patients can afford the care needed for optimal health.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Does injury type influence patient preference, response rates, and data completeness for online or telephone follow-up following injury?

INTRODUCTION

Collecting patient-reported outcomes in a systematic fashion is important to understand recovery trajectories and compare performance between different services and fields of care. These outcomes can be collected through a variety of means, but studies comparing different follow-up methods in patients with a variety of injury types are scarce. This study aimed to compare follow-up data from three injury registries to quantify patient preference for telephone versus online follow-up, determine factors associated with choosing online follow-up, and compare response rates based on the patient's preferred follow-up method.

METHODS

A registry-based cohort study of adult (≥16 years) patients registered one of three registries from January 2021 to December 2021 was undertaken. Patients who survived to discharge were contacted by telephone and offered the option of telephone or online self-completion at six- and 12-months post-injury using the EQ-5D-5L. The three injury cohorts and telephone/online groups were compared for differences in characteristics, follow-up rates, and data completeness. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of choosing online completion in the three cohorts.

RESULTS

Data were retrieved for 8,049 patients. A greater proportion of orthopaedic trauma patients initially opted for online follow-up (41.0 %) compared to major trauma (31.0 %) and burns (24.1 %) patients. Orthopaedic and major trauma patients had increased odds of choosing online follow-up compared to burns patients (adjusted odds ratio [95 % confidence interval] 2.9 [2.2-3.7] and 2.1 [1.6-2.7], respectively). A greater proportion of major trauma patients (69.3 %) and burns patients (64.3 %) completed both follow-ups compared to orthopaedic trauma patients (52.4 %). The overall completion rates for the EQ-5D-5L were high.

CONCLUSIONS

While follow-up preference and completion were higher for telephone-based follow-ups, the findings suggest a patient's preference for completing post-injury follow-ups differs according to the type of injury they sustained, and that allowing patients a choice of their preferred follow-up method is important. The variety of follow-up methods offered should therefore reflect the needs of different patient groups, which may allow for the development of algorithms or workflow processes. Directing certain patients towards a particular follow-up method could deliver higher and more efficient follow-up rates.

An executive summary of the National Trauma Research Action Plan

ABSTRACT

The National Trauma Research Action Plan project successfully engaged multidisciplinary experts to define opportunities to advance trauma research and has fulfilled the recommendations related to trauma research from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine report. These panels identified more than 4,800 gaps in our knowledge regarding injury prevention and the optimal care of injured patients and laid out a priority framework and tools to support researchers to advance this field. Trauma research funding agencies and researchers can use this executive summary and supporting manuscripts to strategically address and close the highest priority research gaps. Given that this is the most significant public health threat facing our children, young adults, and military service personnel, we must do better in prioritizing these research projects for funding and providing grant support to advance this work. Through the Coalition for National Trauma Research, the trauma community is committed to a coordinated, collaborative approach to address these critical knowledge gaps and ultimately reduce the burden of morbidity and mortality faced by our patients.

Quality of life of survivors following road traffic orthopaedic injuries in Rwanda

Background

Road traffic injuries (RTI) pose a global public health threat, especially in low- and middle-income nations. These injuries typically cause orthopaedic problems that may negatively impair a person's physical and mental health and quality of life. Our study examined the quality of life of road traffic orthopaedic injuries (RTOI) survivors.

Methods

A cross-sectional study at five Rwandan referral hospitals, included 369 adult RTOI victims. Two years post-injury, participants completed the European Quality of life 5 Dimension 5 (EQ-5D-5L) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Questionnaire between June 2 and August 31, 2022, with informed consent. Three EQ-5D-5L-VAS scores were used: low (0-40%), fair (41-60%), and excellent (61-100%). We used logistic regression analysis with a significance threshold of p < 0.05 to determine odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI.

Results

The RTOI victims had a mean age of 37.5 ± 11.26 years with sex ratio M:F:3:1. Usual activities (66.8%) and mobility (54.8%) were the most affected EQ-5D-5L dimensions. Residence, hospital stay, rehabilitation, and return to work affected mobility, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The EQ-5D-5L/VAS score showed 34.95% poor QoL (0-40%) and 35.50% good QoL. Factors affecting QoL include level of education (OR = 1.66, p < <0.01), type of intervention (OR = 1.22, p = 0.003), rehabilitation (OR = 2.41, p < 0.01) and level of disability (OR = 196.41, p < 0.01). Mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain, comfort, anxiety, and depression vary moderately on Shannon's index.

Conclusion

The study highlights the significant impact of road traffic orthopaedic injuries (RTOI) on survivors' quality of life in Rwanda, revealing challenges in mobility and daily activities. Factors influencing quality of life include education level, medical intervention type, rehabilitation, and disability degree. The findings emphasize the need for tailored rehabilitation strategies and policy interventions to improve long-term outcomes for RTOI survivors.

Implementation of health-related quality of life in the German TraumaRegister DGU® - first results of a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Approximately 30,000 people are affected by severe injuries in Germany each year. Continuous progress in prehospital and hospital care has significantly reduced the mortality of polytrauma patients. With increasing survival rates, the functional outcome, health-related quality (hrQoL) of life and ability to work are now gaining importance. Aim of the study is, the presentation of the response behavior of seriously injured patients on the one hand and the examination of the factors influencing the quality of life and ability to work 12 months after major trauma on the other hand. Building on these initial results, a standard outcome tool shall be integrated in the established TraumaRegister DGU® in the future.

METHODS

In 2018, patients [Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 16; age:18-75 years] underwent multicenter one-year posttraumatic follow-up in six study hospitals. In addition to assessing hrQoL by using the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), five additional questions (treatment satisfaction; ability to work; trauma-related medical treatment; relevant physical disability, hrQoL as compared with the prior to injury status) were applied.

RESULTS

Of the 1,162 patients contacted, 594 responded and were included in the analysis. The post-injury hrQoL does not show statistically significant differences between the sexes. Regarding age, however, the younger the patient at injury, the better the SF-12 physical sum score. Furthermore, the physically perceived quality of life decreases statistically significantly in relation to the severity of the trauma as measured by the ISS, whereas the mentally perceived quality of life shows no differences in terms of injury severity. A large proportion of severely injured patients were very satisfied (42.2%) or satisfied (39.9%) with the treatment outcome. It should be emphasized that patients with a high injury severity (ISS > 50) were on average more often very satisfied with the treatment outcome (46.7%). A total of 429 patients provided information on their ability to work 12 months post-injury. Here, 194 (45.2%) patients had a full employment, and 58 (13.5%) patients were had a restricted employment.

CONCLUSION

The present results show the importance of a structured assessment of the postinjury hrQoL and the ability to work after polytrauma. Further studies on the detection of influenceable risk factors on hrQoL and ability to work in the intersectoral course of treatment should follow to enable the best possible outcome of polytrauma survivors.

Financial toxicity part II: A practical guide to measuring and tracking long-term financial outcomes among acute care surgery patients

ABSTRACT

Acute care surgery (ACS) patients are frequently faced with significant long-term recovery and financial implications that extend far beyond their hospitalization. While major injury and emergency general surgery (EGS) emergencies are often viewed solely as acute moments of crisis, the impact on patients can be lifelong. Financial outcomes after major injury or emergency surgery have only begun to be understood. The Healthcare Economics Committee from the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma previously published a conceptual overview of financial toxicity in ACS, highlighting the association between financial outcomes and long-term physical recovery. The aims of second-phase financial toxicity review by the Healthcare Economics Committee of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma are to (1) understand the unique impact of financial toxicity on ACS patients; (2) delineate the current limitations surrounding measurement domains of financial toxicity in ACS; (3) explore the "when, what and how" of optimally capturing financial outcomes in ACS; and (4) delineate next steps for integration of these financial metrics in our long-term patient outcomes. As acute care surgeons, our patients' recovery is often contingent on equal parts physical, emotional, and financial recovery. The ACS community has an opportunity to impact long-term patient outcomes and well-being far beyond clinical recovery.

The invisible scars: Unseen financial complications worsen every aspect of long-term health in trauma survivors

BACKGROUND

Trauma survivors are susceptible to experiencing financial toxicity (FT). Studies have shown the negative impact of FT on chronic illness outcomes. However, there is a notable lack of data on FT in the context of trauma. We aimed to better understand prevalence, risk factors, and impact of FT on trauma long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Adult trauma patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥9 treated at Level I trauma centers were interviewed 6 months to 14 months after discharge. Financial toxicity was considered positive if patients reported any of the following due to the injury: income loss, lack of care, newly applied/qualified for governmental assistance, new financial problems, or work loss. The Impact of FT on Patient Reported Outcome Measure Index System (PROMIS) health domains was investigated.

RESULTS

Of 577 total patients, 44% (254/567) suffered some form of FT. In the adjusted model, older age (odds ratio [OR], 0.4; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.2-0.81) and stronger social support networks (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.74) were protective against FT. In contrast, having two or more comorbidities (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.01-3.28), lower education levels (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 95%, 1.26-3.03), and injury mechanisms, including road accidents (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.51-4.77) and intentional injuries (OR, 4.31; 95% CI, 1.44-12.86) were associated with higher toxicity. No significant relationship was found with ISS, sex, or single-family household. Patients with FT had worse outcomes across all domains of health. There was a negative linear relationship between the severity of FT and worse mental and physical health scores.

CONCLUSION

Financial toxicity is associated with long-term outcomes. Incorporating FT risk assessment into recovery care planning may help to identify patients most in need of mitigative interventions across the trauma care continuum to improve trauma recovery. Further investigations to better understand, define, and address FT in trauma care are warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

The most critically injured polytrauma patient mortality: should it be a measurement of trauma system performance?

PURPOSE

The risk of death after traumatic injury in developed trauma systems is at an all-time low. Among 'major trauma' patients (injury severity score, ISS > 15), the risk of dying is less than 10%. This group contains critical polytrauma patients (ISS 50-75), with high risks of death. We hypothesized that the reduction in trauma mortality was driven by reduction in moderate injury severity and that death from critical polytrauma remained persistently high.

METHODS

A 20-year retrospective analysis ending December 2021 of a Level-1 trauma center's registry was performed on all trauma patients admitted with ISS > 15. Patients' demographics, injury severity and outcomes were collected. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed. Mortality was examined for the entire study group and separately for the subset of critical polytrauma patients (ISS 50-75).

RESULTS

A total of 8462 severely injured (ISS > 15) trauma patients were identified during the 20-year period. Of these 238 (2.8%) were critical polytrauma patients (ISS 50-75). ISS > 15 mortality decreased from 11.3 to 9.4% over the study period (Adjusted OR 0.98, 0.97-0.99). ISS 50-75 mortality did not change significantly (46.2-60.0%), adjusted OR 0.96, 0.92-1.00).

CONCLUSION

The improvement in trauma mortality over the past 20 years has not been experienced equally. The ISS50-75 critical polytrauma mortality is a practical group to capture. It could be a group for deeper study and reporting to drive improvement.

Multicenter evaluation of financial toxicity and long-term health outcomes after injury

BACKGROUND

Despite the growing awareness of the negative financial impact of traumatic injury on patients' lives, the association between financial toxicity and long-term health-related quality of life (hrQoL) among trauma survivors remains poorly understood.

METHODS

Patients from nine trauma centers participating in a statewide trauma quality collaborative had responses from longitudinal survey data linked to inpatient trauma registry data. Financial toxicity was defined based on patient-reported survey responses regarding medical debt, work or income loss, nonmedical financial strain, and forgone care due to costs. A financial toxicity score ranging from 0 to 4 was calculated. Health-related quality of life was assessed using the EuroQol 5 Domain tool. Multivariable regression models evaluated the association between financial toxicity and hrQoL outcomes while adjusting for patient demographics, injury severity and inpatient treatment intensity, and health systems variables.

RESULTS

Among the 403 patients providing 510 completed surveys, rates of individual financial toxicity elements ranged from 21% to 46%, with 65% of patients experiencing at least one element of financial toxicity. Patients with any financial toxicity had worse summary measures of hrQoL and higher rates of problems in all five EuroQol 5 Domain domains ( p < 0.05 for all). Younger age, lower household income, lack of insurance, more comorbidities, discharge to a facility, and air ambulance transportation were independently associated with higher odds of financial toxicity ( p < 0.05 for all). Injury traits and inpatient treatment intensity were not independently associated with financial toxicity.

CONCLUSION

A majority of trauma survivors in this study experienced some level of financial toxicity, which was independently associated with worse risk-adjusted health outcomes across all hrQoL measures. Risk factors for financial toxicity are not related to injury severity or treatment intensity but rather to sociodemographic variables and measures of prehospital and posthospital health care resource utilization. Targeted interventions and policies are needed to address financial toxicity and ensure optimal recovery for trauma survivors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Severe Abdominal Trauma: A Secondary Analysis of the Damage Control Laparotomy Trial

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following abdominal trauma. We hypothesized that patients undergoing definitive laparotomy (DEF) would have better PROs compared to those treated with damage control laparotomy (DCL).

METHODS

The DCL Trial randomized DEF versus DCL in abdominal trauma. PROs were measured using the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D) questionnaire at discharge and six months postdischarge (1 = perfect health, 0 = death, and <0 = worse than death) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist-Civilian. Unadjusted Bayesian analysis with a neutral prior was used to assess the posterior probability of achieving minimal clinically important difference.

RESULTS

Of 39 randomized patients (21 DEF versus 18 DCL), 8 patients died (7 DEF versus 1 DCL). Of those who survived, 28 completed the EQ-5D at discharge (12 DEF versus 16 DCL) and 25 at 6 mo (12 DEF versus 13 DCL). Most patients were male (79%) with a median age of 30 (interquartile range (IQR) 21-42), suffered blunt injury (56%), and were severely injured (median injury severity score 33, IQR 21 - 42). Median EQ-5D value at discharge was 0.20 (IQR 0.06 - 0.52) DEF versus 0.31 (IQR -0.03 - 0.43) DCL, and at six months 0.51 (IQR 0.30 - 0.74) DEF versus 0.50 (IQR 0.28 - 0.84) DCL. The posterior probability of minimal clinically important difference DEF versus DCL at discharge and six months was 16% and 23%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional deficits for trauma patients persist beyond the acute setting regardless of laparotomy status. These deficits warrant longitudinal studies to better inform patients on recovery expectations.

Developing a National Trauma Research Action Plan: Results from the trauma systems and informatics panel Delphi survey

BACKGROUND

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016 report on the trauma care system recommended establishing a National Trauma Research Action Plan to strengthen and guide future trauma research. To address this recommendation, the Department of Defense funded a study to generate a comprehensive research agenda spanning the trauma and burn care continuum. Panels were created to conduct a gap analysis and identify high-priority research questions. The National Trauma Research Action Plan panel reported here addressed trauma systems and informatics.

METHODS

Experts were recruited to identify current gaps in trauma systems research, generate research questions, and establish the priorities using an iterative Delphi survey approach from November 2019 through August 2020. Panelists were identified to ensure heterogeneity and generalizability, including military and civilian representation. Panelists were encouraged to use a PICO format to generate research questions: patient/population, intervention, compare/control, and outcome. In subsequent surveys, panelists prioritized each research question on a 9-point Likert scale, categorized as low-, medium-, and high-priority items. Consensus was defined as ≥60% agreement.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven subject matter experts generated 570 research questions, of which 427 (75%) achieved the consensus threshold. Of the consensus reaching questions, 209 (49%) were rated high priority, 213 (50%) medium priority, and 5 (1%) low priority. Gaps in understanding the broad array of interventions were identified, including those related to health care infrastructure, technology products, education/training, resuscitation, and operative intervention. The prehospital phase of care was highlighted as an area needing focused research.

CONCLUSION

This Delphi gap analysis of trauma systems and informatics research identified high-priority research questions that will help guide investigators and funding agencies in setting research priorities to continue to work toward Zero Preventable Deaths after trauma.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Measuring long-term outcomes after injury: current issues and future directions

Maximizing long-term outcomes for patients following injury is the next challenge in the delivery of patient-centered trauma care. The following review outlines three important components in trauma outcomes: (1) data gathering and monitoring, (2) the impact of traumatic brain injury, and (3) trajectories in recovery and identifies knowledge gaps and areas for needed future research.

Developing a National Trauma Research Action Plan: Results from the long-term outcomes research gap Delphi survey

BACKGROUND

In the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016 report on trauma care, the establishment of a National Trauma Research Action Plan to strengthen and guide future trauma research was recommended. To address this recommendation, the Department of Defense funded the Coalition for National Trauma Research to generate a comprehensive research agenda spanning the continuum of trauma and burn care. We describe the gap analysis and high-priority research questions generated from the National Trauma Research Action Plan panel on long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Experts in long-term outcomes were recruited to identify current gaps in long-term trauma outcomes research, generate research questions, and establish the priority for these questions using a consensus-driven, Delphi survey approach from February 2021 to August 2021. Panelists were identified using established Delphi recruitment guidelines to ensure heterogeneity and generalizability including both military and civilian representation. Panelists were encouraged to use a PICO format to generate research questions: Patient/Population, Intervention, Compare/Control, and Outcome model. On subsequent surveys, panelists were asked to prioritize each research question on a 9-point Likert scale, categorized to represent low-, medium-, and high-priority items. Consensus was defined as ≥60% of panelists agreeing on the priority category.

RESULTS

Thirty-two subject matter experts generated 482 questions in 17 long-term outcome topic areas. By Round 3 of the Delphi, 359 questions (75%) reached consensus, of which 107 (30%) were determined to be high priority, 252 (70%) medium priority, and 0 (0%) low priority. Substance abuse and pain was the topic area with the highest number of questions. Health services (not including mental health or rehabilitation) (64%), mental health (46%), and geriatric population (43%) were the topic areas with the highest proportion of high-priority questions.

CONCLUSION

This Delphi gap analysis of long-term trauma outcomes research identified 107 high-priority research questions that will help guide investigators in future long-term outcomes research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic Tests or Criteria; Level IV.

Completeness and Mismatch of Patient-Important Outcomes After Trauma

To assess the completeness of the collection of patient-important outcomes and the mismatch between outcomes measured in research and patients' important issues after trauma.

Summary Background Data

To date, severe trauma has mainly been assessed using in-hospital mortality. Yet, with 80 to 90% survivors discharged from hospital, it is critical to assess the collection of patient important long-term outcomes of trauma.

Methods

Mixed methods study combining a systematic review of outcomes and their comparison with domains elicited by patients during a qualitative study. We searched Medline, EMBASE and clinicaltrials.gov from January 1, 2014 to September 30, 2019 and extracted all outcomes from reports including severe trauma. We compared these outcomes with 97 domains that matter to trauma survivors identified in a previous qualitative study. We defined as patient-important outcome as the 10 most frequently elicited domains in the qualitative study. We assessed the number of domains captured in each report to illustrate the completeness of the collection of patient-important outcomes. We also assessed the mismatch between outcomes collected and what matters to patients.

Findings

Among the 116 reports included in the systematic review, we identified 403 outcomes collected with 154 unique measurements tools. Beside mortality, measurement tools most frequently used were the Glasgow Outcome Scale (31.0%, n=36), questions on patients' return to work (20,7%, n=24) and the EQ-5D (19.0%, n=22). The comparison between the outcomes identified in the systematic review and the domains from the qualitative study found that 10.3% (n=12) reports did not collect any patient-important domains and one collected all 10 patient-important domains. By examining each of the 10 patient-important domains, none was collected in more than 72% of reports and only five were among the ten most frequently measured domains in studies.

Conclusion

The completeness of the collection of the long-term patient-important outcomes after trauma can be improved. There was a mismatch between the domains used in the literature and those considered important by patients during a qualitative study.

Value in acute care surgery, part 2: Defining and measuring quality outcomes

ABSTRACT

The prior article in this series delved into measuring cost in acute care surgery, and this subsequent work explains in detail how quality is measured. Specifically, objective quality is based on outcome measures, both from administrative and clinical registry databases from a multitude of sources. Risk stratification is key in comparing similar populations across diseases and procedures. Importantly, a move toward focusing on subjective outcomes like patient-reported outcomes measures and financial well-being are vital to evolving surgical quality measures for the 21st century.

Screening tools for predicting posttraumatic stress disorder in acutely injured adult trauma patients: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Adult trauma patients are at risk of developing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Early intervention reduces the development of PTSD, but few trauma patients seek and obtain care. Valid and reliable screening tools are needed to identify patients at risk of developing PTSD. The objective of this review is to identify existing screening tools and evaluate their accuracy for predicting PTSD outcomes.

METHODS

PubMed, PsychInfo, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies evaluating the predictive accuracy of PTSD screening tools among traumatically injured adult civilians. Eligible studies assessed patients during acute hospitalization and at least 1 month following injury to measure PTSD outcome. Eligible outcomes included measures of predictive accuracy, such as sensitivity and specificity. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias of each study, and the strength of evidence was assessed following the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality guidelines.

RESULTS

Forty-nine studies were included evaluating the predictive accuracy of 38 screening tools. Most tools were assessed in a single study. Questionnaire-style tools had more favorable predictive ability than diagnostic interview assessments. The Injured Trauma Survivor Screen, Posttraumatic Adjustment Screen, the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5, and the Richmond et al. tool demonstrated the most favorable predictive accuracy, with high sensitivity (75-100%) and specificity (67-94%). Common sources of bias were selection bias due to high attrition rate and using nondiagnostic tools to assess PTSD symptoms at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Although sensitivity and specificity of PTSD predictive tools varied widely, several emerged with favorable predictive accuracy. Further research is needed to define the ability of screening and intervention to prevent PTSD in injured trauma survivors. The results of this review can inform screening tool options for screening programs and future intervention studies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review, level III.

Measuring functional outcomes in major trauma: can we do better?

PURPOSE

There is relatively limited large scale, long-term unified evidence to describe how quality of life (QoL) and functional outcomes are affected after polytrauma. The aim of this study is to review validated measures available to assess QoL and functional outcomes and make recommendations on how best to assess patents after major trauma.

METHODS

PubMed and EMBASE databases were interrogated to identify suitable patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for use in major trauma, and current practice in their use globally.

RESULTS

Overall, 81 papers met the criteria for inclusion and evaluation. Data from these were synthesised. A full set of validated PROMs tools were identified for patients with polytrauma, as well as critique of current tools available, allowing us to evaluate practice and recommend specific outcome measures for patients following polytrauma, and system changes needed to embed this in routine practice moving forward.

CONCLUSION

To achieve optimal outcomes for patients with polytrauma, we will need to focus on what matters most to them, including their needs (and unmet needs). The use of appropriate PROMs allows evaluation and improvement in the care we can offer. Transformative effects have been noted in cases where they have been used to guide treatment, and if embedded as part of the wider system, it should lead to better overall outcomes. Accordingly, we have made recommendations to this effect. It is time to seize the day, bring these measures even further into our routine practice, and be part of shaping the future.

Core outcome measures for research in traumatic injury survivors: The National Trauma Research Action Plan modified Delphi consensus study

BACKGROUND

Until recently, survival has been the main outcome measure for injury research. Given the impact of injury on quality of life, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine has called for advancing the science of research evaluating the long-term outcomes of trauma survivors. This is necessary so that treatments and interventions can be assessed for their impact on a trauma patients' long-term functional and psychosocial outcomes. We sought to propose a set of core domains and measurement instruments that are best suited to evaluate long-term outcomes after traumatic injury with a goal for these measures to be adopted as a national standard.

METHODS

As part of the development of a National Trauma Research Action Plan, we conducted a two-stage, five-round modified online Delphi consensus process with a diverse panel of 50 key stakeholders including clinicians, researchers, and trauma survivors from more than 9 professional areas across the United States. Before voting, panelists reviewed the results of a scoping review on patient-reported outcomes after injury and standardized information on measurement instruments following the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments guidelines.

RESULTS

The panel considered a preliminary list of 74 outcome domains (patient-reported outcomes) and ultimately reached the a priori consensus criteria for 29 core domains that encompass aspects of physical, mental, social, and cognitive health. Among these 29 core domains, the panel considered a preliminary list of 199 patient-reported outcome measures and reached the a priori consensus criteria for 14 measures across 13 core domains. Participation of panelists ranged from 65% to 98% across the five Delphi rounds.

CONCLUSION

We developed a core outcome measurement set that will facilitate the synthesis, comparison, and interpretation of long-term trauma outcomes research. These measures should be prioritized in all future studies in which researchers elect to evaluate long-term outcomes of traumatic injury survivors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic Test or Criteria, Level IV.

Health-related quality of life and functional outcome measures for pediatric multiple injury: A systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Pediatric multiple injury is a major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide, with varied long-term sequelae. To improve care, a better understanding of the outcome tools used following multiple injury is needed.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to (1) identify the outcome tools used to assess functional and health-related quality of life outcomes in pediatric multiple injury and to (2) describe the tool domains and validity.

METHODS

Eligible studies were those that included pediatric participants aged 0 to 17 years who experienced multiple injury or severe trauma based on Injury Severity Score/Abbreviated Injury Scale score and a functional outcome tool was used to assess outcomes (e.g., physical, psychological, quality of life). Excluded study designs were editorials, narrative, and systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Twenty-two papers were included encompassing 16,905 participants and 34 different outcome tools. Ten tools were validated in children of which 4 were multiple injury specific; 18 were validated in adults of which 8 were trauma specific, and 6 were previously unvalidated. The tools were a mixture of patient reported (7 of 10 validated in children and 13 of 18 validated in adults) and clinician reported (3 of 10 validated in children and 2 of 13 validated in adults). Pediatric tool domains assessed were function, mobility, activities of daily living, pain, school, cognition, emotional domains, mental health, behavior, and high-risk behaviors. Using adult-validated tools to assess children may not capture the children's true function and health-related quality of life.

CONCLUSION

There was a lack of consistency in the outcome tools used following multiple injury in children. Adult-validated measures may not accurately capture pediatric outcomes after multiple injury. To fully understand the impact of pediatric multiple injury and make comparisons between studies, development of a core outcome set is required.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Quantitative observational studies, level III.

Developing a National Trauma Research Action Plan (NTRAP): Results from the Pediatric Research Gap Delphi Survey

BACKGROUND

In 2016, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine trauma report recommended a National Trauma Research Action Plan (NTRAP) to "strengthen trauma research and ensure that the resources available for this research are commensurate with the importance of injury and the potential for improvement in patient outcomes." With a contract from the Department of Defense, the Coalition for National Trauma Research (CNTR) created 11 expert panels to address this recommendation, with the goal of developing a comprehensive research agenda, spanning the continuum of trauma and burn care. This report outlines the work of the group focused on pediatric trauma.

METHODS

Experts in pediatric trauma clinical care and research were recruited to identify gaps in current clinical pediatric trauma research, generate research questions, and establish the priority of these questions using a consensus-driven Delphi survey approach. Using successive surveys, participants were asked to rank the priority of each research question on a 9-point Likert scale categorized to represent priority. Consensus was defined as >60% agreement within the priority category. Priority questions were coded based on a dictionary of 118 NTRAP taxonomy concepts in nine categories to support comparative analysis across all panels.

RESULTS

37 subject matter experts generated 625 questions. 493 questions (79%) reached consensus on priority level. Of those reaching consensus, 159 (32%) were High, 325 (66%) Medium and 9 (2%) Low priority. The highest priority research questions related to surgical interventions for traumatic brain injury (ICP monitoring and craniotomy); second highest priority was hemorrhagic shock. The prehospital setting was the highest priority phase of care.

CONCLUSIONS

This diverse panel of experts determined that most significant pediatric trauma research gaps were in traumatic brain injur, hemorrhagic shock, and the prehospital phase of care. These research domains should be top priorities for funding agencies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Settling the Score: Injury Severity Score Fails to Capture Nuances in Pediatric Trauma

OBJECTIVES

Recent work has questioned the accuracy of the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) in the pediatric population. We sought to determine mortality rates in pediatric trauma patients at ISSs considered "severe" in adults and whether mortality would vary substantially between adults and children sustaining injuries with the same AIS.

METHODS

Univariate logistic regression was used to generate mortality rates associated with ISS scores, for children (<16 years of age) and adults, using the 2016 National Trauma Data Bank. Mortality rates at an ISS of 15 were calculated in both groups. We similarly calculated ISS scores associated with mortality rates of 10%, 25%, and 50%. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to compare the discriminative ability of ISS to predict mortality after blunt and penetrating injuries in adults and children. Mortality rates associated with 1 or more AIS 3 injuries per body region were defined.

RESULTS

There were 855,454 cases, 86,414 (10.1%) of which were children. The ISS associated with 10%, 25%, and 50% mortality were 35, 44, and 53, respectively, in children; they were 27, 38, and 48 in adults. At an ISS of 15, pediatric mortality was 1.0%; in adults, it was 3.1%. A 3.1% mortality rate was not observed in children until an ISS of 25. On receiver operating characteristic analysis, the ISS performed better in children compared with adults (area under the curve, 0.965 vs 0.860 [P < 0.001]). Adults consistently suffered from higher mortality rates than did children with the same number of severe injuries to a body region, and mortality varied widely between specific selected AIS 3 injuries.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the ISS predicts mortality well, children have lower mortality than do adults for the same ISS, and therefore, the accepted definition of severe injury is not equivalent between these 2 cohorts. Mortality risk is highly dependent on the specific nature of the injury, with large variability in outcomes despite identical AIS scores.

A core outcome set for damage control laparotomy via modified Delphi method

OBJECTIVES

Damage control laparotomy (DCL) remains an important tool in the trauma surgeon's armamentarium. Inconsistency in reporting standards have hindered careful scrutiny of DCL outcomes. We sought to develop a core outcome set (COS) for DCL clinical studies to facilitate future pooling of data via meta-analysis and Bayesian statistics while minimizing reporting bias.

METHODS

A modified Delphi study was performed using DCL content experts identified through Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) 'landmark' DCL papers and EAST ad hoc COS task force consensus.

RESULTS

Of 28 content experts identified, 20 (71%) participated in round 1, 20/20 (100%) in round 2, and 19/20 (95%) in round 3. Round 1 identified 36 potential COS. Round 2 achieved consensus on 10 core outcomes: mortality, 30-day mortality, fascial closure, days to fascial closure, abdominal complications, major complications requiring reoperation or unplanned re-exploration following closure, gastrointestinal anastomotic leak, secondary intra-abdominal sepsis (including anastomotic leak), enterocutaneous fistula, and 12-month functional outcome. Despite feedback provided between rounds, round 3 achieved no further consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

Through an electronic survey-based consensus method, content experts agreed on a core outcome set for damage control laparotomy, which is recommended for future trials in DCL clinical research. Further work is necessary to delineate specific tools and methods for measuring specific outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

V, criteria.

Developing a national trauma research action plan: Results from the Burn Research Gap Delphi Survey

BACKGROUND

The 2016 National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine call for a national integrated, military-civilian trauma action plan to achieve zero preventable deaths and disability after injury included a proposal to establish a National Trauma Research Action Plan to "strengthen trauma research and ensure that the resources available for this research are commensurate with the importance of injury and the potential for improvement in patient outcomes." The Department of Defense funded the Coalition for National Trauma Research to generate a comprehensive research agenda spanning the continuum of trauma/burn care from prehospital to rehabilitation. The Burn/Reconstructive Surgery group represents one focus area for this research agenda development.

METHODS

Experts in burn and reconstructive surgery research identified gaps in knowledge, generated research questions and prioritized questions using a consensus driven Delphi survey approach. Participants were identified using established Delphi recruitment guidelines to ensure heterogeneity and generalizability with military and civilian representatives. Literature reviews informed the panel. Panelists were encouraged to use a PICO format to generate research questions: Patient/Population; Intervention; Compare/Control; Outcome. Participants ranked the priority of each question on a nine-point Likert scale, which was categorized to represent low, medium, and high priority items. Consensus was defined based on ≥60% panelist agreement.

RESULTS

Subject matter experts generated 949 research questions in 29 Burn & 26 Reconstruction topics. Five hundred ninety-seven questions reached consensus. Of these, 338 (57%) were high-priority, 180 (30%), medium-priority, and 78 (13%) low-priority questions.

CONCLUSION

Many high-priority questions translate to complex wound management and outcomes. Panel recognition that significant gaps in knowledge exist in understanding functional outcomes after injury underscores the importance of long-term recovery metrics even when studying acute injury or interventions such as resuscitation or inhalation injury. Funding agencies and burn/reconstructive surgery researchers should consider these gaps when they prioritize future research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Expert consensus, Level IV.

Main factors predicting somatic, psychological, and cognitive patient outcomes after significant injury: a pilot study of a simple prognostic tool

Background

There are still insufficient data on the complexity and predictability of patient-related outcomes following trauma. The aim of this study was to assess longer-term outcomes in patients with significant injury and to develop a simple scoring method to identify patients at high risk of subsequent deficits 1–2 years after injury.

Methods

We conducted a prospective cohort study of survivors of significant injury (New Injury Severity Score, NISS greater than or equal to 8), with analysis of patients’ 1- to 2-year health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and their functional outcomes based on Short Form-36 (SF-36), Trauma Outcome Profile (TOP), and Quality Of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI). Documented variables suspected or known from the literature to be possible factors associated with outcome were first analysed by univariate analysis, and significant variables were entered into a stepwise logistic regression analysis. Scores predicting longer-term impaired outcome were constructed from risk factors resulting from multivariate analysis.

Results

Depending on the patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) used, up to 30 per cent of 1052 study patients (mean NISS 18.6) indicated somatic, 27 per cent psychological, and 54 per cent cognitive deficits. The investigated sociodemographic, injury-related, treatment, and early hospital outcome variables demonstrated only low associations with longer-term outcome in univariate analysis that were highest for preinjury pain or function (R = 0.4) and outcome at hospital discharge (R = 0.3). After logistic regression, the study variables explained a maximum variance of 23 per cent for somatic, 11 per cent for psychological, and 14 per cent for cognitive longer-term outcomes. The resulting Aarau trauma prognostic longer-term outcome scoring (ATPLOS) system, developed by checking eight risk factors, had a specificity of up to 80 per cent, and importantly may facilitate early detection of patients at risk of a poorer longer-term outcome.

Conclusion

Despite the high rate of deficits recorded for survivors of significant injury, particularly in loss of cognitive function, the multiple variables analysed only led to a limited characterization of patient-related longer-term outcomes. Until more is known about additional individual influencing factors, the proposed scoring system may serve well for clinical evaluation.

Registration number

NCT 02165137 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)

Long-Term Outcomes after Pediatric Injury: Results of the Assessment of Functional Outcomes and Health-Related Quality of Life after Pediatric Trauma Study

BACKGROUND

Disability and impaired health-related quality of life can persist for months among injured children. Previous studies of long-term outcomes have focused mainly on children with specific injury types rather than those with multiple injured body regions. This study's objective was to determine the long-term functional status and health-related quality of life after serious pediatric injury, and to evaluate the associations of these outcomes with features available at hospital discharge.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a prospective observational study at 7 Level I pediatric trauma centers of children treated for at least 1 serious (Abbreviated Injury Scale severity 3 or higher) injury. Patients were sampled to increase the representation of less frequently injured body regions and multiple injured body regions. Six-month functional status was measured using the Functional Status Scale (FSS) and health-related quality of life using the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory.

RESULTS

Among 323 injured children with complete discharge and follow-up assessments, 6-month FSS score was abnormal in 33 patients (10.2%)-16 with persistent impairments and 17 previously normal at discharge. Increasing levels of impaired discharge FSS score were associated with impaired FSS and lower Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory scores at 6-month follow-up. Additional factors on multivariable analysis associated with 6-month FSS impairment included older age, penetrating injury type, severe head injuries, and spine injuries, and included older age for lower 6-month Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Older age and discharge functional status are associated with long-term impairment of functional status and health-related quality of life. Although most seriously injured children return to normal, ongoing disability and reduced health-related quality of life remained 6 months after injury. Our findings support long-term assessments as standard practice for evaluating the health impacts of serious pediatric injury.

Insult to injury: National analysis of return to work and financial outcomes of trauma patients

BACKGROUND

While much of trauma care is rightly focused on improving inpatient survival, the ultimate goal of recovery is to help patients return to their daily lives after injury. Although the overwhelming majority of trauma patients in the United States survive to hospital discharge, little is known nationally regarding the postdischarge economic burden of injuries among trauma survivors.

METHODS

We used the National Health Interview Survey from 2008 to 2017 to identify working-age trauma patients, aged 18 to 64 years, who sustained injuries requiring hospitalization. We used propensity score matching to identify noninjured respondents. Our primary outcome measure was postinjury return to work among trauma patients. Our secondary outcomes included measures of food insecurity, medical debt, accessibility and affordability of health care, and disability.

RESULTS

A nationally weighted sample of 319,580 working-age trauma patients were identified. Of these patients, 51.7% were employed at the time of injury, and 58.9% of them had returned to work at the time of interview, at a median of 47 days postdischarge. Higher rates of returning to work were associated with shorter length of hospital stay, higher education level, and private health insurance. Injury was associated with food insecurity at an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.8 (95% confidence interval, 1.40-2.37), with difficulty affording health care at aOR of 1.6 (1.00-2.47), with medical debt at aOR of 2.6 (2.11-3.20), and with foregoing care due to cost at aOR of 2.0 (1.52-2.63). Working-age trauma patients had disability at an aOR of 17.6 (12.93-24.05).

CONCLUSION

The postdischarge burden of injury among working-age US trauma survivors is profound-patients report significant limitations in employment, financial security, disability, and functional independence. A better understanding of the long-term impact of injury is necessary to design the interventions needed to optimize postinjury recovery so that trauma survivors can lead productive and fulfilling lives after injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic & Value-Based Evaluations, level II; Prognostic, level II.

Seven-year excess mortality, functional outcome and health status after trauma in Hong Kong

PURPOSE

The purpose was to investigate long-term health impacts of trauma and the aim was to describe the functional outcome and health status up to 7 years after trauma.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, multi-centre cohort study of adult trauma patients admitted to three regional trauma centres with moderate or major trauma (ISS ≥ 9) in Hong Kong (HK). Patients were followed up at regular time points (1, 6 months and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 years) by telephone using extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) and the Short-Form 36 (SF36). Observed annual mortality rate was compared with the expected mortality rate estimated using the HK population cohort. Linear mixed model (LMM) analyses examined the changes in SF36 with subgroups of age ≥ 65 years, ISS > 15, and GOSE ≥ 5 over time.

RESULTS

At 7 years, 115 patients had died and 48% (138/285) of the survivors responded. The annual mortality rate (AMR) of the trauma cohort was consistently higher than the expected mortality rate from the general population. Forty-one percent of respondents had upper good recovery (GOSE = 8) at 7 years. Seven-year mean PCS and MCS were 45.06 and 52.06, respectively. LMM showed PCS improved over time in patients aged < 65 years and with baseline GOSE ≥ 5, and the MCS improved over time with baseline GOSE ≥ 5. Higher mortality rate, limited functional recovery and worse physical health status persisted up to 7 years post-injury.

CONCLUSION

Long-term mortality and morbidity should be monitored for Asian trauma centre patients to understand the impact of trauma beyond hospital discharge.

Leveraging a health information exchange to examine the accuracy of self-report emergency department utilization data among hospitalized injury survivors

Background

Accurate acute care medical utilization history is an important outcome for clinicians and investigators concerned with improving trauma center care. The objective of this study was to examine the accuracy of self-report emergency department (ED) utilization compared with utilization obtained from the Emergency Department Information Exchange (EDIE) in admitted trauma surgery patients with comorbid mental health and substance use problems.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of 169 injured patients admitted to the University of Washington’s Harborview Level I Trauma Center. Patients had high levels of post-traumatic stress disorder and depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation and alcohol comorbidity. The investigation used EDIE, a novel health technology tool that collects information at the time a patient checks into any ED in Washington and other US states. Patterns of EDIE-documented visits were described, and the accuracy of injured patients’ self-report visits was compared with EDIE-recorded visits during the course of the 12 months prior to the index trauma center admission.

Results

Overall, 45% of the sample (n=76) inaccurately recalled their ED visits during the past year, with 36 participants (21%) reporting less ED visits than EDIE indicated and 40 (24%) reporting more ED visits than EDIE indicated. Patients with histories of alcohol use problems and major psychiatric illness were more likely to either under-report or over-report ED health service use.

Discussion

Nearly half of all patients were unable to accurately recall ED visits in the previous 12 months compared with EDIE, with almost one-quarter of patients demonstrating high levels of disagreement. The improved accuracy and ease of use when compared with self-report make EDIE an important tool for both clinical and pragmatic trial longitudinal outcome assessments. Orchestrated investigative and policy efforts could further examine the benefits of introducing EDIE and other information exchanges into routine acute care clinical workflows.

Level of evidence

II/III.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02274688.

Pediatric Firearm Injuries and Fatalities: Do Racial Disparities Exist?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate racial disparities among White and Black pediatric firearm injury patients on a national level.

BACKGROUND

Pediatric firearm-related morbidity and mortality are rising in the United States. There is a paucity of data examining racial disparities in those patients.

METHODS

The Pediatric Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2017) was queried for pediatric (age ≤17 years) patients admitted with firearm injuries. Patients were stratified by race: White and Black. Injury characteristics were assessed. Outcomes were mortality, hospital length of stay, and discharge disposition. Hierarchical regression models were performed to determine predictors of mortality and longer hospital stays.

RESULTS

A total of 3717 pediatric firearm injury patients were identified: Blacks (67.0%) and Whites (33.0%). The majority of patients were male (84.2%). The most common injury intent in both groups was assault (77.3% in Blacks vs in 45.4% Whites; P<0.001), followed by unintentional (21.1% vs 35.4%; P<0.001), and suicide (1.0% vs 14.0%; P<0.001). The highest fatality rate was in suicide injuries (62.6%). On univariate analysis, White children had higher mortality (17.5% vs 9.8%; P<0.001), longer hospital stay [3 (1-7) vs 2 (1-5) days; P = 0.021], and more psychiatric hospital admissions (1.3% vs 0.1%; P<0.001). On multivariate analysis, suicide intent was found to be an independent predictor of mortality (aOR 2.67; 95% CI 1.35-5.29) and longer hospital stay (β + 4.13; P<0.001), while White race was not.

CONCLUSION

Assault is the leading intent of injury in both Black and White children, but White children suffer more from suicide injuries that are associated with worse outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III Prognostic.

Participant retention in trauma intensive care unit (ICU) follow-up studies: a post-hoc analysis of a previous scoping review

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to synthesize participant retention-related data for longitudinal follow-up studies of survivors from trauma intensive care units (ICUs).

METHODS

Within a published scoping review evaluating ICU patient outcomes after hospital discharge, two screeners independently searched for trauma ICU survivorship studies.

RESULTS

There were 11 trauma ICU follow-up studies, all of which were cohort studies. Twelve months (range: 1-60 months) was the most frequent follow-up time point for assessment (63% of studies). Retention rates ranged from 54% to 94% across time points and could not be calculated for two studies (18%). Pooled retention rates at 3, 6, and 12 months were 75%, 81%, and 81%, respectively. Mean patient age (OR 0.85 per 1-year increase, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99, p=0.036), percent of men (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.10, p=0.002), and publication year (OR 0.89 per 1-year increase, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.95, p=0.007) were associated with retention rates. Early (3-month) versus later (6-month, 12-month) follow-up time point was not associated with retention rates.

DISCUSSION

Pooled retention rates were >75%, at 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month time points, with wide variability across studies and time points. There was little consistency with reporting participant retention methodology and related data. More detailed reporting guidelines, with better author adherence, will help improve reporting of participant retention data. Utilization of existing research resources may help improve participant retention.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III: meta-analyses (post-hoc analyses) of a prior scoping review.

Long-term patient-reported outcome measures after injury: National Trauma Research Action Plan (NTRAP) scoping review protocol

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of patients who survive traumatic injury continue to suffer impaired functional status and increased mortality long after discharge. However, despite the need to improve long-term outcomes, trauma registries in the USA do not collect data on outcomes or care processes after discharge. One of the main barriers is the lack of consensus regarding the optimal outcome metrics.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the methodology of a scoping review evaluating current evidence on the available measures for tracking functional and patient-reported outcomes after injury. The aim of the review was to identify and summarize measures that are being used to track long-term functional recovery and patient-reported outcomes among adults after injury.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed and Embase will be performed using the search terms for the population (adult trauma patients), type of outcomes (long-term physical, mental, cognitive, and quality of life), and measures available to track them. Studies identified will be reviewed and assessed for relevance by at least two reviewers. Data will be extracted and summarized using descriptive statistics and a narrative synthesis of the results. This protocol is being reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines.

DISSEMINATION

This scoping review will provide information regarding the currently available metrics for tracking functional and patient-reported outcomes after injury. The review will be presented to a multi-disciplinary stakeholder group that will evaluate these outcome metrics using an online Delphi approach to achieve consensus as part of the development of the National Trauma Research Action Plan (NTRAP). The results of this review will be presented at relevant national surgical conferences and published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.