The Future of Trauma Surgery???A Perspective

Abdominal injuries in a major Scandinavian trauma center - performance assessment over an 8 year period

INTRODUCTION

Damage control surgery and damage control resuscitation have reduced mortality in patients with severe abdominal injuries. The shift towards non-operative management in haemodynamically stable patients suffering blunt abdominal trauma has further contributed to the improved results. However, in many countries, low volume of trauma cases and limited exposure to trauma laparotomies constitute a threat to trauma competence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the institutional patient volume and performance for patients with abdominal injuries over an eight-year period.

METHODS

Data from 955 consecutive trauma patients admitted in Oslo University Hospital Ulleval with abdominal injuries during the eight-year period 2002-2009 were retrospectively explored. A separate analysis was performed on all trauma patients undergoing laparotomy during the same period, whether abdominal injuries were identified or not. Variable life-adjusted display (VLAD) was used in order to describe risk-adjusted survival trends throughout the period and the patients admitted before (Period 1) and after (Period 2) the institution of a formal Trauma Service (2005) were compared.

RESULTS

There was a steady increase in admitted patients with abdominal injuries, while the number of patients undergoing laparotomy was constant exposing the surgical trauma team leaders to an average of 8 trauma laparotomies per year. No increase in missed injuries or failures of non-operative management was detected. Unadjusted mortality rates decreased from period 1 to period 2 for all patients with abdominal injuries as well as for the patients undergoing laparotomy. However, this apparent decrease was not confirmed as significant in TRISS-based analysis of risk-adjusted mortality. VLAD demonstrated a steady performance throughout the study period.

CONCLUSION

Even in a high volume trauma center the exposure to abdominal injuries and trauma laparotomies is limited. Due to increasing NOM, an increasing number of patients with abdominal injuries was not accompanied by an increase in number of laparotomies. However, we have demonstrated a stable performance throughout the study period as visualized by VLAD without an increase in missed injuries or failures of NOM.

Trauma surgery to acute care surgery: defining the paradigm shift

BACKGROUND

Trauma surgery is gradually evolving into acute care surgery (ACS). We sought to better define this evolution by using work relative value units (wRVU) to characterize the current practices of trauma and ACS.

METHODS

Fiscal year 2007-2008 data from the UHC-AAMC Faculty Practice Solutions Center database, which is comprised of coding or billing data from 85 institutions was used. We compared averages for trauma surgeons with general, oncology, and vascular surgeons.

RESULTS

Trauma surgeons are distinct from other surgical specialties; only 43% of their total wRVU were procedural compared to 69% to 75% for vascular, surgical oncology, and general surgeons. The total procedures for each specialty were similar: trauma 660, general surgery 715, surgical oncology 713, vascular 835, but trauma surgeons performed more bedside procedures. Of the top 20 total wRVU generating procedures, 20% of trauma surgeon's were bedside compared to 0% of a general surgeon's. The wRVU or surgeon for cholecystectomy were comparable between trauma and general surgery (388 vs. 452); both groups perform about 75% of the cholecystectomies laparoscopically. With respect to appendectomies, wRVU or surgeon for trauma surgeons (180) exceeded general surgeons (128). Each group performed approximately 65% laparoscopically.

CONCLUSIONS

Trauma surgeons are distinctly different from their colleagues, with a greater emphasis on intensive care unit "cognitive" work. The number of procedures performed by trauma surgeons is comparable to other disciplines but with more "bedside" procedures. Trauma surgeons' high appendectomy wRVUs may be a reflection of the transition to an ACS model. The characterization of trauma surgery as nonoperative and intensive care unit-based is in part substantiated but there are indications of a paradigm shift toward more operative experience with transition to an ACS model.

The role of emergency medicine physicians in trauma care in North America: evolution of a specialty

The role of Emergency Medicine Physicians (EMP) in the care of trauma patients in North America has evolved since the advent of the specialty in the late 1980's. The evolution of this role in the context of the overall demands of the specialty and accreditation requirements of North American trauma centers will be discussed. Limited available data published in the literature examining the role of EMP's in trauma care will be reviewed with respect to its implications for an expanded role for EMPs in trauma care. Two training models currently in the early stages of development have been proposed to address needs for increased manpower in trauma and the critical care of trauma patients. The available information regarding these models will be reviewed along with the implications for improving the care of trauma patients in both Europe and North America.

The U.S. trauma surgeon's current scope of practice: can we deliver acute care surgery?

BACKGROUND

The evolving discipline of acute care surgery as an expansion of trauma surgery is undergoing intense critique. As we envision this new paradigm of surgical practice, an evaluation of our current status across the nation's trauma centers is an essential step. The purpose of this study is to determine the practice patterns of trauma surgeons at major trauma centers throughout the United States.

METHODS

A survey was sent to the trauma directors of the 1,288 designated trauma centers in the United States, as listed by the American Trauma Society. As proposed, acute care surgery would encompass performing emergent abdominal, vascular, and thoracic trauma procedures as well as providing critical care. The addition of simple orthopedic and neurosurgical procedures has been considered.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 72% among the Level I/II/III centers (n = 515) with 92% of Level I, 72% of Level II, and 59% of Level III centers responding. Of the 169 Level I centers, 31 (18%) reported their trauma surgeons perform the full complement of thoracic, vascular, and abdominal cases. Trauma surgeons managed the full range of injuries at 11 (6%) of the 187 Level II centers and 7 (4%) of the 159 Level III centers. At these 49 centers, only 41% of surgeons perform elective thoracic and vascular cases. The remaining 466 centers enlist a combination of vascular and thoracic surgeons to manage trauma patients. Finally, trauma surgeons performed cranial burr holes at eight trauma centers, placement of ICP monitors at four, and open fracture washout at three trauma centers.

CONCLUSIONS

The model of the acute care surgeon is attractive and timely, but only a limited number of trauma surgeons currently practice this proposed range of operative procedures; even fewer surgeons have an elective surgical practice to maintain key operative skills. Fellowship training programs need to incorporate vascular and thoracic procedures to enable the specialty of acute care surgery.

Broken bones and orthopedist groans: can an acute care surgeon fix both?

BACKGROUND

Increasing reluctance of specialty surgeons to participate in trauma care has placed undue burden on orthopedic traumatologists at Level I trauma centers and prompted the exploration of an expanded role for general trauma surgeons in the initial management of select orthopedic injuries (OI) as an acute care surgeon. This study characterizes OI sustained by trauma patients (TPs) to analyze the feasibility of this concept.

METHODS

The National Trauma Data Bank was queried for specific information relating to the profile of OI. International Classification of Diseases-9th Revision codes were used to select patients for the study who sustained OI alone or in combination with other injuries as well as to determine body region of injury and a status of open or closed fractures. Skeletal Abbreviated Injury Scale scores were used to determine the severity of fractures, and International Classification of Diseases-9th Revision procedure codes were used to identify the nature of initial operative management.

RESULTS

Of the 1,130,093 patients studied, 557,541 (49%) had one or more reported OI. Open injuries constituted 11.4% of all OIs and occurred in 7.5% of all TPs. Distribution of OIs was 23% upper extremity (18% open) and 35% lower extremity (also 18% open). These represent a 15% and 22% occurrence in TP. Pelvic and acetabular fractures occurred in 13% of OI patients (4% open) and 6% of all TP. The mean skeletal Abbreviated Injury Scale of all OIs was 2.3. For upper extremities it was 2.2, for lower extremities and for pelvic or acetabular injuries it was 2.4. Closed reduction of joint dislocation was performed in 2% of OI and 1% of all TPs. Of these, 45% were on the hip, 8% on the knee, 15% on the ankle, 13% on the elbow, and 20% on the shoulder. The distribution of initial interventions for all patients with OI was irrigation and debridement (I&D) 13%, external fixator (ex-fix) application 25%, closed reduction 41%, and closed joint relocation 10%. Of all open injuries, 17% underwent I&D and 31% underwent ex-fix application. The median time to I&D or ex-fix application was 7.2 hours. One percent of these procedures were performed within 1 hour of hospital admission, 11% within 6 hours of hospital admission.

CONCLUSION

OI occur in a significant portion of TP reported to the National Trauma Data Bank. They most commonly involve the lower extremities and are of moderate severity. Given this profile, it seems feasible to propose that some initial procedures can be mastered by nonorthopedic surgeons and that select OI management be within the purview of a properly trained and credentialed acute care surgeon.

Surgical management of blunt thoracic and abdominal injuries in Quebec: a limited volume

BACKGROUND

Trauma care of thoracic and abdominal injuries is currently in turmoil because of both a decrease in the number of these injuries and a concomitant increase in their nonsurgical management. The goal of this study was to evaluate the incidence of thoracic and abdominal injuries in the province of Quebec and the number of associated surgical procedures.

METHODS

Patients with blunt thoracic or abdominal injuries taken to a tertiary trauma center in the province of Quebec from April 1, 1998 to March 31, 2002 were identified. Patients who were dead on arrival were excluded. Only patients with an Abbreviated Injury Scale score > or =2 for the thoracic or abdominal regions were included.

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 16,430 blunt trauma patients were admitted to one of the four trauma centers. A total of 2,660 (16.2%) patients sustained thoracic and/or abdominal injuries with an Abbreviated Injury Scale score >1. Among these, the median Injury Severity Score was 24 (range: 4-75) and the in-hospital mortality rate was 11.0%. There were 2,196 patients (82.5%) with thoracic injuries, 977 patients (36.7%) with abdominal injuries, and 520 patients (19.5%) with injuries to both regions. A surgical intervention was undertaken in 76 patients with thoracic injuries (3.5%) and in 414 patients with abdominal injuries (42.3%). On average, 4.7 thoracic and 28.8 abdominal trauma procedures were performed per center, yearly. Each trauma surgeon performed, on average, less than one thoracic and less than five abdominal trauma procedures yearly.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of blunt thoracic and abdominal injuries needing surgical intervention is low in Quebec tertiary trauma centers. The competence of general surgeons in trauma-related procedures might be compromised by such low patient volume unless they frequently perform non-trauma surgical procedures. We think that in Quebec, trauma care must be provided by surgeons who practice both acute emergency and elective surgical care in addition to trauma care. These findings should have an important impact on the development of on-going education and resident training programs.

Ethical imperatives in staffing and managing a trauma intensive care unit

As U.S. trauma surgery evolves to embrace the concept and practice of acute care surgery, the organization and management structure of the intensive care unit must also grow to reflect new challenges and imperatives faced by trauma surgeons. Key issues to be explored in light of acute care surgery include the role of the traumatologist/intensivist in the intensive care unit, as opposed to the traumatologist without specific critical care training, and a potentially expanded role for nonsurgical intensivists as the critical care time available for trauma/intensivists wanes due to increased surgical and non-critical care patient volume. Each of these changes to the practice of trauma/surgical critical care and acute care surgery are evaluated in light of the primacy of appropriately trained intensivists in the critical care unit. The ethics of providing the best care possible is interrogated in light of different service models in both the university and community settings. The roles of residents, fellows, and midlevel practitioners in supporting the goal of the intensivist and the critical care team is similarly explored. A recommendation for an ethical organizational and management structure is presented.

Measuring the attitudes and impact of the eighty-hour workweek rules on orthopaedic surgery residents

BACKGROUND

The literature on graduate medical education contains anecdotal reports of some effects of the new eighty-hour workweek on the attitudes and performance of residents. However, there are relatively few studies detailing the attitudes of large numbers of residents in a particular surgical specialty toward the new requirements.

METHODS

Between July and November 2004, a survey created by the Academic Advocacy Committee of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons was distributed by mail, fax, and e-mail to a total of 4207 orthopaedic residents at the postgraduate year-1 through year-6 levels of training. The survey responses were tabulated electronically, and the results were recorded.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 13.2% (554 residents). Sixty-eight percent (337) of the 495 respondents whose postgraduate-year level was known were at the postgraduate year-4 level or higher. Attitudes concerning the duty rules were mixed. Twenty-three percent of the 554 respondents thought that eighty hours constituted an appropriate number of duty hours per week; 41% believed that eighty hours were too many, and 34% thought that eighty hours were not sufficient. Thirty-three percent of the respondents had worked greater than eighty hours during at least a single one-week period since the new rules were implemented; this occurred more commonly among the postgraduate year-3 and more junior residents. Orthopaedic trauma residents had the most difficulty adhering to the new duty-hour restrictions. Eighty-two percent of the respondents indicated that their residency programs have been forced to make changes to their call schedules or to hire ancillary staff to address the rules. The use of physician assistants, night-float systems, and so-called home-call assignments were the most common strategies used to achieve compliance.

CONCLUSION

Resident attitudes toward the work rules are mixed. The rules have forced residency programs to restructure. Junior residents have more favorable attitudes toward the new standards than do senior residents. Self-reporting of duty hours is the most common method of monitoring in orthopaedic training programs. Such systems allow ample opportunity for inaccuracies in the measurement of hours worked. Although residents report an improved quality of life as a result of these new rules, the attitude that the quality of training is diminished persists.

Trauma Surgery in the Era of Nonoperative Management: The Dutch Model

BACKGROUND

Falling operative experience and diminished job satisfaction of trauma surgeons appears to be in part the result of nonoperative management of many blunt injuries. In The Netherlands, the responsibility of trauma surgeons includes the operative treatment of most pelvic and extremity injures, as well as the overall coordination of care. This study describes the type and number of operative procedures performed by a group of trauma surgeons at a trauma center in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

METHODS

The study was conducted in a university Level I trauma center with 1,250 annual trauma admissions (90% blunt trauma), of which 125 had an Injury Severity Score of 16 or above. During a 3-year period (2001-2003), all operative interventions performed by or under direct supervision of the trauma surgeons were retrospectively analyzed and categorized into eight groups.

RESULTS

During the 3-year period, 2,011 operations were performed by the trauma surgeon group. Of these, 1,459 were single procedures and 552 were multiple interventions leading to a total of 2,784 procedures. Nonurgent procedures (n = 915) constituted 45% of the operations, whereas acute procedures (n = 1,096) accounted for 55% of the operations. Of the acute operations, almost 60% were performed during office hours; the remaining operations were performed outside office hours (evening 37%, night 13%, weekend 50%).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the addition of (non)operative fracture care results in a viable mix of surgical and nonsurgical management. This leads to broad skills and could enhance job satisfaction. These data could be of interest for the current discussion on the future of trauma surgery in North America and might give a lead to increase the attractiveness of our profession for future trauma surgeons.

The Shape of Things to Come: Results From a National Survey of Trauma Surgeons on Issues Concerning their Future

BACKGROUND

This study seeks to characterize the opinions of practicing surgeons as a basis for formulating a plan to restructure the discipline of trauma surgery and its training path.

METHODS

A 52-item questionnaire was administered to the membership of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma, the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma, and the Western Trauma Association. The survey tool investigated issues related to current and future practice.

RESULTS

Response rate was 60%. Mean age was 49 years and 88% were male. The average time in practice is 15 years. The average workweek is 80 hours with 48% of that time devoted to clinical practice. About half take in-house call and about one-third receive an on-call stipend. The median annual number of major trauma cases was 50. The most important disincentives to entering the field were felt to be lifestyle issues and a limited scope of practice. Almost 90% felt their work as trauma surgeons was undervalued by society and the health care system. The great majority (88%) responded that the discipline of trauma surgery must change. Respondents feel this restructuring should include broader general surgery (83%) as well as limited orthopedic (60%) and neurosurgical trauma-related procedures (59%). About one-half of respondents favored in-house call (54%) and a practice model similar to emergency medicine (55%). Factors that would most enhance practice were thought to be guaranteed appropriate salary and guaranteed time away from work. Training in a broad range of skills was felt to be essential or useful to the trauma surgeon of the future, although few currently employ such a wide breadth of skills.

CONCLUSIONS

Current practicing trauma surgeons feel that the discipline must change to remain viable. This change should entail broader training to allow more procedures in trauma, emergency surgery, critical care, and elective general surgery. The preferred practice model is a large, hospital-based, diversified group practice with a predictable lifestyle and guaranteed salary commensurate with effort. Inclusion of selected emergency orthopedic and neurosurgical procedures are viewed favorably, as is in-house call. Efforts to increase public perception of trauma surgery's value to society and its impending demise are warranted.