Predictive Factors for Undertriage Among Severe Blunt Trauma Patients: What Enables Them to Slip Through an Established Trauma Triage Protocol?

Combination of reverse shock index and simplified motor score as a strong discriminator of trauma outcomes

BACKGROUND

The reverse shock index multiplied by simplified motor score (rSI-sMS) is a novel and rapid measure for assessing injury severity in patients with trauma in prehospital settings; however, its discriminant ability requires further validation.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted from trauma database of Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital to compare the accuracy of the rSI-sMS with that of the shock index, modified shock index, reverse shock index multiplied by the Glasgow Coma Scale (rSI-GCS), and the reverse shock index multiplied by GCS motor subscale (rSI-GCSM) for discriminating in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, prolonged ICU stays ≥14 days, and prolonged hospital stays ≥30 days in patients with trauma.

RESULTS

A total of 11,760 patients from the trauma database were included. rSI-sMS had significantly better accuracy in discriminating in-hospital mortality, ICU admissions, prolonged ICU stays (≥14 days), and prolonged hospital stays (≥30 days) than the shock index, modified shock index, and rSI-GCSM, whereas its accuracy was similar to that of the rSI-GCS. Furthermore, rSI-sMS had better accuracy for discriminating clinical outcomes in patients with an injury severity score (ISS) ≥16, motor vehicle collisions, falls, no chronic disease, and cardiovascular disease as well as in geriatric and nongeriatric patients. In patients with mixed and isolated brain injuries, rSI-sMS accurately discriminated the four clinical outcomes, similar to rSI-GCS. The optimal cutoff value of rSI-sMS had a discriminant ability of 85.0, 78.6, 75.2, and 81.0% for in-hospital mortality, ICU admissions, ICU stay ≥14 days, and hospital stays of ≥30 days, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the shock index, modified shock index, and rSI-GCSM, rSI-sMS is a more accurate field triage scoring system for discriminating in-hospital mortality, ICU admissions, prolonged ICU stay, and prolonged hospital stays in patients with trauma.

Prehospital Shock Index Multiplied by the Alert/Verbal/Painful/Unresponsive Score as a Predictor of Clinical Outcomes in Traumatic Injury

OBJECTIVE

Various prediction scores have been developed to predict mortality in trauma patients, such as the shock index (SI), modified SI (mSI), age-adjusted SI (aSI), and the shock index (SI) multiplied by the alert/verbal/painful/unresponsive (AVPU) score (SIAVPU). The SIAVPU is a novel scoring system but its prediction accuracy for trauma outcomes remains in need of further validation. Therefore, we investigated the accuracy of four scoring systems, including SI, mSI, aSI, and SIAVPU, in predicting mortality, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and prolonged hospital length of stay ≥ 30 days (LOS).

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter study used data from the Tzu Chi Hospital trauma database. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was determined for each outcome to assess their discrimination capabilities and comparing by Delong's test. Subgroup analyses were conducted to investigate the prediction accuracy of the SIAVPU in different patient populations.

RESULTS

In total, 5355 patients were included in the analysis. The median of SIAVPU were significantly higher among patients at those with major injury (1.47 vs 0.63), those admitted to the ICU (0.73 vs 0.62), those with prolonged hospital LOS≥ 30 days (0.83 vs 0.64), and those with mortality (1.08 vs 0.64). The AUROC of the SIAVPU was significantly higher than that of the SI, mSI, and aSI for 24-h mortality (AUROC: 0.845 vs 0.533, 0.540, and 0.678), 3-day mortality (AUROC: 0.803 vs 0.513, 0.524, and 0.688), 7-day mortality (AUROC: 0.755 vs 0.494, 0.505, and 0.648), in-hospital mortality (AUROC: 0.722 vs 0.510, 0.524, and 0.667), ICU admission (AUROC: 0.635 vs 0.547, 0.551, and 0.563). At the optimal cutoff value of 0.9, the SIAVPU had an accuracy of 82.2% for predicting 24-h mortality, 82.8% for predicting 3-day mortality, of 82.8% for predicting 7-day mortality, of 82.5% for predicting in-hospital mortality, of 73.9% for predicting Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, and of 81.7% for predicting prolonged hospital LOS ≥30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results reveal that SIAVPU has better accuracy than the SI, mSI, and aSI for predicting 24-h, 3-day, 7-day, and in-hospital mortality; ICU admission; and prolonged hospital LOS ≥30 days among patients with traumatic injury.

Liquid Biopsy in Organ Damage: small extracellular vesicle chip-based assessment of polytrauma

Background

Despite major advances in medicine, blood-borne biomarkers are urgently needed to support decision-making, including polytrauma. Here, we assessed serum-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) as potential markers of decision-making in polytrauma.

Objective

Our Liquid Biopsy in Organ Damage (LiBOD) study aimed to differentiate polytrauma with organ injury from polytrauma without organ injury. We analysed of blood-borne small EVs at the individual level using a combination of immunocapture and high-resolution imaging.

Methods

To this end, we isolated, purified, and characterized small EVs according to the latest Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles (MISEV) guidelines from human blood collected within 24 h post-trauma and validated our results using a porcine polytrauma model.

Results

We found that small EVs derived from monocytes CD14+ and CD14+CD61+ were significantly elevated in polytrauma with organ damage. To be precise, our findings revealed that CD9+CD14+ and CD14+CD61+ small EVs exhibited superior performance compared to CD9+CD61+ small EVs in accurately indicating polytrauma with organ damage, reaching a sensitivity and a specificity of 0.81% and 0.97%, respectively. The results in humans were confirmed in an independent porcine model of polytrauma.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that these specific types of small EVs may serve as valuable, non-invasive, and objective biomarkers for assessing and monitoring the severity of polytrauma and associated organ damage.

On Scene Injury Severity Prediction (OSISP) model for trauma developed using the Swedish Trauma Registry

BACKGROUND

Providing optimal care for trauma, the leading cause of death for young adults, remains a challenge e.g., due to field triage limitations in assessing a patient's condition and deciding on transport destination. Data-driven On Scene Injury Severity Prediction (OSISP) models for motor vehicle crashes have shown potential for providing real-time decision support. The objective of this study is therefore to evaluate if an Artificial Intelligence (AI) based clinical decision support system can identify severely injured trauma patients in the prehospital setting.

METHODS

The Swedish Trauma Registry was used to train and validate five models - Logistic Regression, Random Forest, XGBoost, Support Vector Machine and Artificial Neural Network - in a stratified 10-fold cross validation setting and hold-out analysis. The models performed binary classification of the New Injury Severity Score and were evaluated using accuracy metrics, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and Precision-Recall curve (AUCPR), and under- and overtriage rates.

RESULTS

There were 75,602 registrations between 2013-2020 and 47,357 (62.6%) remained after eligibility criteria were applied. Models were based on 21 predictors, including injury location. From the clinical outcome, about 40% of patients were undertriaged and 46% were overtriaged. Models demonstrated potential for improved triaging and yielded AUC between 0.80-0.89 and AUCPR between 0.43-0.62.

CONCLUSIONS

AI based OSISP models have potential to provide support during assessment of injury severity. The findings may be used for developing tools to complement field triage protocols, with potential to improve prehospital trauma care and thereby reduce morbidity and mortality for a large patient population.

Risk factors and mortality associated with undertriage after major trauma in a physician-led prehospital system: a retrospective multicentre cohort study

PURPOSE

To assess the incidence of undertriage in major trauma, its determinant, and association with mortality.

METHODS

A multicentre retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from a French regional trauma registry (2011-2017). All major trauma (Injury Severity Score ≥ 16) cases aged ≥ 18 years and managed by a physician-led mobile medical team were included. Those transported to a level-II/III trauma centre were considered as undertriaged. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with undertriage.

RESULTS

A total of 7110 trauma patients were screened; 2591 had an ISS ≥ 16 and 320 (12.4%) of these were undertriaged. Older patients had higher risk for undertriage (51-65 years: OR = 1.60, 95% CI [1.11; 2.26], p = 0.01). Conversely, injury mechanism (fall from height: 0.62 [0.45; 0.86], p = 0.01; gunshot/stab injuries: 0.45 [0.22; 0.90], p = 0.02), on-scene time (> 60 min: 0.62 [0.40; 0.95], p = 0.03), prehospital endotracheal intubation (0.53 [0.39; 0.71], p < 0.001), and prehospital focussed assessment with sonography [FAST] (0.15 [0.08; 0.29], p < 0.001) were associated with a lower risk for undertriage. After adjusting for severity, undertriage was not associated with a higher risk of mortality (1.22 [0.80; 1.89], p = 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

In our physician-led prehospital EMS system, undertriage was higher than recommended. Advanced aged was identified as a risk factor highlighting the urgent need for tailored triage protocol in this population. Conversely, the potential benefit of prehospital FAST on triage performance should be furthered explored as it may reduce undertriage. Fall from height and penetrating trauma were associated with a lower risk for undertriage suggesting that healthcare providers should remain vigilant of the potential seriousness of trauma associated with low-energy mechanisms.

Time to Whole Blood Transfusion in Hemorrhaging Civilian Trauma Patients: There Is Always Room for Improvement

BACKGROUND

Whole blood (WB) is becoming the preferred product for the resuscitation of hemorrhaging trauma patients. However, there is a lack of data on the optimum timing of receiving WB. We aimed to assess the effect of time to WB transfusion on the outcomes of trauma patients.

STUDY DESIGN

The American College of Surgeons TQIP 2017 to 2019 database was analyzed. Adult trauma patients who received at least 1 unit of WB within the first 2 hours of admission were included. Patients were stratified by time to first unit of WB transfusion (first 30 minutes, second 30 minutes, and second hour). Primary outcomes were 24-hour and in-hospital mortality, adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 1,952 patients were identified. Mean age and systolic blood pressure were 42 ± 18 years and 101 ± 35 mmHg, respectively. Median Injury Severity Score was 17 [10 to 26], and all groups had comparable injury severities (p = 0.27). Overall, 24-hour and in-hospital mortality rates were 14% and 19%, respectively. Transfusion of WB after 30 minutes was progressively associated with increased adjusted odds of 24-hour mortality (second 30 minutes: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.07, p = 0.015; second hour: aOR 2.39, p = 0.010) and in-hospital mortality (second 30 minutes: aOR 1.79, p = 0.025; second hour: aOR 1.98, p = 0.018). On subanalysis of patients with an admission shock index >1, every 30-minute delay in WB transfusion was associated with higher odds of 24-hour (aOR 1.23, p = 0.019) and in-hospital (aOR 1.18, p = 0.033) mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Every minute delay in WB transfusion is associated with a 2% increase in odds of 24-hour and in-hospital mortality among hemorrhaging trauma patients. WB should be readily available and easily accessible in the trauma bay for the early resuscitation of hemorrhaging patients.

Diagnostic performance of biomarker S100B and guideline adherence in routine care of mild head trauma

BACKGROUND

The Scandinavian Neurotrauma Committee (SNC) has recommended the use of serum S100B as a biomarker for mild low-risk Traumatic brain injuries (TBI). This study aimed to assess the adherence to the SNC guidelines in clinical practice and the diagnostic performance of S100B in patients with TBI. The aims of this study were to examine adherence to the SNC guideline and the diagnostic accuracy of serum protein S100B.

METHODS

Data of consecutive patients of 18 years and above who presented to the emergency department (ED) at Helsingborg Hospital with isolated head injuries, were retrieved from hospital records. Patients with multitrauma, follow-up visits, and visits managed by a nurse without physician involvement were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 1671 patients were included of which 93 (5.6%) had intracranial hemorrhage. CT scans were performed in 62% of patients. S100B was measured in 26% of patients and 30% of all measurements targeted the low-risk mild head injuries indicated by the guideline. S100B's recommended cut-off value (≥ 0.10 µg/L) had a 100% sensitivity, 47% specificity, 10.1% positive predictive value, and 100% negative predictive value-if applied to the target SNC category (SNC 4). If applied to all patients tested, the sensitivity was 93% for traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (TICH). Current ED practices were adherent to the SNC guideline in 55% of patients. Non-adherent practices occurred in 64% of patients with low-risk mild head injuries (SNC4) including overtesting or undertesting of S100B and CT scans.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to guidelines was low and associated with a higher admission rate than non-adherence practice but no significant increase in missed TICH or death associated with non-adherence to guideline was found. In routine care, we found that the sensitivity and NPV of serum protein S100B was excellent and safely ruled out TICH when measured in the patient category recommended by the guideline. However, measuring serum protein S100B in patients not recommended by the guideline rendered unacceptably low sensitivity with possible missed TICHs as a consequence. To further delineate the magnitude and impact of non-adherence, more studies are needed.

Failure to initiate trauma team activation for patients who meet the criteria in a level 1 paediatric trauma centre: which patients are missing out?

BACKGROUND

Trauma team activation (TTA) is paramount in the early hospital management of trauma patients. This study aimed to evaluate factors which contribute to failure to activate the Trauma team for management of paediatric trauma.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of Emergency Department (ED) presentations at the paediatric major trauma hospital in Adelaide, South Australia was conducted over a 16-month period. Data from the hospital's trauma registry, individual case files and digital medical records were evaluated to determine factors that were associated with no TTA.

RESULTS

During the study period, 617 trauma patients who met Level 1 or Level 2 TTA criteria attended the trauma centre. For 29 (4.7%) of these patients, there was no TTA. Predictors of no TTA included sustaining abdomen and/or pelvis injuries compared to limb injuries (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] = 10.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.98-56.69, P = 0.006), sustaining non-accidental injury (NAI) versus an injury with vehicle involvement (OR = 30.13, 95% CI 6.43-141.21, P < 0.001), and arriving via emergency medical retrieval service compared to private vehicle (OR = 14.23, 95% CI 3.94-51.36, P < 0.001). No patients transferred directly to Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU), or High Dependency Unit (HDU) received an appropriate TTA.

CONCLUSION

Multiple factors were associated with no TTA in paediatric trauma patients. The results highlight that even in PICU and HDU admissions and transfer patients, vigilant clarification of mechanism of injury and potential for occult injuries should be undertaken to ensure appropriate TTA and improve patient outcome.

Antiplatelet therapy contributes to a higher risk of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage compared to anticoagulation therapy in ground-level falls: a single-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common injury and constitutes up to 3% of emergency department (ED) visits. Current studies show that TBI is most commonly inflicted in older patients after ground-level falls. These patients often take medications affecting coagulation such as anticoagulants or antiplatelet drugs. Guidelines for ED TBI-management assume that anticoagulation therapy (ACT) confers a higher risk of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (TICH) than antiplatelet therapy (APT). However, recent studies have challenged this. This study aimed to evaluate if oral anticoagulation and platelet inhibitors affected rate of TICH in head-trauma patients with ground-level falls.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of medical records during January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 and January 1 2020 to December 31, 2020 of all patients seeking ED care because of head-trauma. Patients ≥ 18 years with ground-level falls were included.

RESULTS

The study included 1938 head-trauma patients with ground-level falls. Median age of patients with TICH was 81 years. The RR for TICH in APT-patients compared to patients without medication affecting coagulation was 1.72 (p = 0.01) (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.13-2.60) and 1.08 (p = 0.73), (95% CI 0.70-1.67) in ACT-patients. APT was independently associated with TICH in regression analysis (OR 1.59 (95% CI 1.02-2.49), p = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

This study adds to the growing evidence that APT-patients with ground-level falls might have as high or higher risk of TICH than ACT-patients. This is not addressed in the current guidelines which may need to be updated. We therefore recommend broad prospective studies.

Trauma resource pit stop: increasing efficiency in the evaluation of lower severity trauma patients

Background

Overtriage of trauma patients is unavoidable and requires effective use of hospital resources. A 'pit stop' (PS) was added to our lowest tier trauma resource (TR) triage protocol where the patient stops in the trauma bay for immediate evaluation by the emergency department (ED) physician and trauma nursing. We hypothesized this would allow for faster diagnostic testing and disposition while decreasing cost.

Methods

We performed a before/after retrospective comparison after PS implementation. Patients not meeting trauma activation (TA) criteria but requiring trauma center evaluation were assigned as a TR for an expedited PS evaluation. A board-certified ED physician and trauma/ED nurse performed an immediate assessment in the trauma bay followed by performance of diagnostic studies. Trauma surgeons were readily available in case of upgrade to TA. We compared patient demographics, Injury Severity Score, time to physician evaluation, time to CT scan, hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. Comparisons were made using 95% CI for variance and SD and unpaired t-tests for two-tailed p values, with statistical difference, p<0.05.

Results

There were 994 TAs and 474 TRs in the first 9 months after implementation. TR's preanalysis versus postanalysis of the TR group shows similar mean door to physician evaluation times (6.9 vs. 8.6 minutes, p=0.1084). Mean door to CT time significantly decreased (67.7 vs. 50 minutes, p<0.001). 346 (73%) TR patients were discharged from ED; 2 (0.4%) were upgraded on arrival. When admitted, TR patients were older (61.4 vs. 47.2 years, p<0.0001) and more often involved in a same-level fall (59.5% vs. 20.1%, p<0.0001). Undertriage was calculated using the Cribari matrix at 3.2%.

Discussion

PS implementation allowed for faster door to CT time for trauma patients not meeting activation criteria without mobilizing trauma team resources. This approach is safe, feasible, and simultaneously decreases hospital cost while improving allocation of trauma team resources.

Level of evidence

Level II, economic/decision therapeutic/care management study.

Microwave scan and brain biomarkers to rule out intracranial hemorrhage: study protocol of a planned prospective study (MBI01)

Purpose

The aim of this planned study is to evaluate the ability of a cranial microwave scanner in conjunction with nine brain biomarkers (Aβ40, Aβ42, GFAP, H-FABP, S100B, NF-L, NSE, UCH-L1 and IL-10) to detect and rule out traumatic intracranial hemorrhage in an emergency department setting. Traumatic brain injury is a world-wide topic of interest for researchers and clinicians. It affects 2% of the population per annum and presents challenges for physicians as patients’ initial signs and symptoms do not always correlate with the extent of brain injury. The gold standard for diagnosis of intracranial hemorrhage is head computerized tomography (CT) with the drawbacks of high cost and radiation exposure. A fast, secure way of diagnosing without these drawbacks has potential to make care more effective and reduce cost.

Methods

Study will be prospective and enroll adult, consenting patients with head trauma who seek emergency department care. Only patients where the treating physician prescribes a head-CT will be included. The microwave scan and blood sampling will be performed in close temporal proximity to the CT scan. Results will be analyzed with sensitivity, specificity and receiver operator characteristics analysis to provide the best combination of a number of biomarkers and the microwave scan.

Conclusion

This study will explore the diagnostic accuracy of a head microwave scanner in combination with biomarkers in ruling out intracranial hemorrhage in traumatic brain injury patients presenting to the emergency department. Potentially, this combined diagnostic approach could achieve both high sensitivity and high specificity, thereby reducing the need of CT-head scans when managing these patients.

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04666766. Registered December 11, 2020.

Accuracy of Prehospital Triage in Selecting Severely Injured Trauma Patients

Importance

A major component of trauma care is adequate prehospital triage. To optimize the prehospital triage system, it is essential to gain insight in the quality of prehospital triage of the entire trauma system.

Objective

To prospectively evaluate the quality of the field triage system to identify severely injured adult trauma patients.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Prehospital and hospital data of all adult trauma patients during 2012 to 2014 transported with the highest priority by emergency medical services professionals to 10 hospitals in Central Netherlands were prospectively collected. Prehospital data collected by the emergency medical services professionals were matched to hospital data collected in the trauma registry. An Injury Severity Score of 16 or more was used to determine severe injury.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The quality and diagnostic accuracy of the field triage protocol and compliance of emergency medical services professionals to the protocol.

Results

A total of 4950 trauma patients were evaluated of which 436 (8.8%) patients were severely injured. The undertriage rate based on actual destination facility was 21.6% (95% CI, 18.0-25.7) with an overtriage rate of 30.6% (95% CI, 29.3-32.0). Analysis of the protocol itself, regardless of destination facility, resulted in an undertriage of 63.8% (95% CI, 59.2-68.1) and overtriage of 7.4% (95% CI, 6.7-8.2). The compliance to the field triage trauma protocol was 73% for patients with a level 1 indication.

Conclusions and Relevance

More than 20% of the patients with severe injuries were not transported to a level I trauma center. These patients are at risk for preventable morbidity and mortality. This finding indicates the need for improvement of the prehospital triage protocol.

Disparities in Timing of Trauma Consultation: A Trauma Registry Analysis of Patient and Injury Factors

BACKGROUND

Efficient trauma systems rely on field and emergency department (ED) personnel to triage patients to the appropriate level of care. Undertriage puts patients at risk, whereas overtriage results in system strain. Although much research has focused on prehospital triage, little is known about trauma triage processes within the ED. We investigated the timing of trauma consultation in the ED of a level I trauma center. We hypothesized that patient characteristics and injury type would be associated with time to consultation, with women, Black patients, older patients, and those with head and torso injuries experiencing longer time to consult.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients aged ≥18 y referred to the trauma service via consultation were recruited retrospectively. Bivariable and multivariable negative binomial regressions were used to assess the association between patient and injury characteristics and time to consult. We used multivariable logistic regression adjusted for patient and injury characteristics to assess for association between time to consult and mortality and length of stay.

RESULTS

Among 588 adult consult patients, median time to consult was 177 min (interquartile range 106-265). In multivariable analysis, Black patients had longer time to consult (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10, 1.60) as did women (IRR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02, 1.29). Head injury was associated with shorter time to consult (IRR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71, 0.92). Time to consult was not associated with mortality or length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient demographics and injury characteristics influenced the timing of trauma consultation. More robust criteria for equitable evaluation of patients are needed to eliminate disparities, prevent delays, and streamline care.

Trauma resource designation: an innovative approach to improving trauma system overtriage

Background

Effective triage of injured patients is often a balancing act for trauma systems. As healthcare reimbursements continue to decline,¹ innovative programs to effectively use hospital resources are essential in maintaining a viable trauma system. The objective of this pilot intervention was to evaluate a new triage model using 'trauma resource' (TR) as a new category in our existing Tiered Trauma Team Activation (TA) approach with hopes of decreasing charges without adversely affecting patient outcome.

Methods

Patients at one Level II Trauma Center (TC) over seven months were studied. Patients not meeting American College of Surgeons criteria for TA were assigned as TR and transported to a designated TC for expedited emergency department (ED) evaluation. Such patients were immediately assessed by a trauma nurse, ED nurse, and board-certified ED physician. Diagnostic studies were ordered, and the trauma surgeon (TS) was consulted as needed. Demographics, injury mechanism, time to physician evaluation, time to CT scan, time to disposition, hospital length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital mortality were analyzed.

Results

Fifty-two of the 318 TR patients were admitted by the TS and were similar to TA patients (N=684) with regard to gender, mean Injury Severity Score, mean LOS and in-hospital mortality, but were older (60.4 vs 47.2 years, p<0.0001) and often involved in a fall injury (52% vs 35%, p=0.0170). TR patients had increased door to physician evaluation times (11.5 vs 0.4 minutes, p<0.0001) and increased door to CT times (76.2 vs 25.9 minutes, p<0.0001). Of the 313 TR patients, 52 incurred charges totaling US$253 708 compared with US$1 041 612 if patients had been classified as TA.

Conclusions

Designating patients as TR prehospital with expedited evaluation by an ED physician and early TS consultation resulted in reduced use of resources and lower hospital charges without increase in LOS, time to disposition or in-hospital mortality.

Level of evidence

Level II.

Clair T, Burns A, Stam E, Williams B. Educational standards for training paramedics in ultrasound: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Paramedic-performed out-of-hospital ultrasound is a novel skill that has gained popularity in some services in recent years. In this setting point-of care ultrasound (POCUS) can provide additional information that can assist with management and guide transport to the most appropriate facility. We sought to explore the different educational approaches used for training paramedics in ultrasound in the out-of-hospital setting.

METHODS

Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBM Reviews, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL plus, The Monash University Research Repository and the British Thesis Library were searched from the 1st of January 1990 to the 6th of April 2016. Google Scholar was searched and reference lists of relevant papers were examined to identify additional studies. Articles were included if they reported on out-of-hospital and POCUS educational approaches for paramedics.

RESULTS

A total of 2002 unique articles were identified of which 18 articles met the inclusion criteria. Most articles reported combined cohorts of emergency providers with varying years of experience though most operators were POCUS naïve. The most common clinical assessment for which paramedic POCUS curricula was described was the focused assessment sonography for trauma (FAST) examination. Education programs varied from two-minutes to two-days with all studies including both didactic and practical training.

CONCLUSION

Education programs for POCUS for paramedics vary considerably, and do not appear to align with qualification level or clinical experience. Further research investigating education and subsequent clinical application of POCUS by paramedics is required, as well as prospective, outcome based studies in order to measure the clinical utility of out-of-hospital POCUS.

Risk factors and mortality associated with undertriage at a level I safety-net trauma center: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this study was to determine the risk factors associated with undertriage and the risk factors for mortality among the undertriaged patients at a level I safety-net trauma center.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of all trauma patients who presented to a level I safety-net trauma center with an injury severity score >15 over a 2-year period (2013-2014). Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to determine the risk factors predictive of undertriage in major trauma patients (injury severity score >15) and of mortality in undertriaged patients.

RESULTS

During the 2-year study period, 334 of 2,485 admitted trauma patients presented with major trauma and were included in our study. From the univariate analysis, variables that were found to be independently associated with mortality in undertriaged patients included intubation, Glasgow Coma Scale score, revised trauma score, and dementia. Independent risk factors that were found to be significantly associated with undertriage in severely injured trauma patients included Glasgow Coma Scale score, motor vehicle crash, falls, revised trauma score, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, intubation, and dementia. When a multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the statistically significant risk factors, dementia was found to be significantly associated with undertriage in severely injured trauma patients.

CONCLUSION

Severely injured trauma patients with dementia are at significant risk for undertriage. Early identification of these risk factors while triaging at a level I safety-net trauma center could translate into improved patient outcomes following severe trauma.

A system of delivering medical staff members by helicopter to manage severely wounded patients in an area where medical resources are limited

Aim

We review the case of a severely injured patient to evaluate the system of delivering medical staff by helicopter in areas with limited medical resources.

Methods

The patient's chart was reviewed, summarized, and presented.

Results

A 22‐year‐old woman attempted a suicidal fall after using a knife to stab herself. She was transported to a local hospital. A radiological study revealed fractures to the patient's face and the base of her skull, pneumocephalus, traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, stab wounds to the neck and chest, pneumothorax, unstable pelvic fracture, and right femoral shaft fracture. Her circulation status became unstable. We sent medical staff members to the local hospital by doctor helicopter. The patient underwent tracheal intubation and the insertion of a chest drain, and was evacuated by doctor helicopter. After aggressive intensive treatments in our hospital, the patient finally obtained social rehabilitation.

Conclusion

In an area where medical resources are limited, sending trained physicians to a referring hospital to appropriately prepare a severely wounded patient for transportation might be the key for the patient to maximize his or her chance of survival.

A regional trauma system to optimize the pre-hospital triage of trauma patients

INTRODUCTION

Pre-hospital triage is a key element in a trauma system that aims to admit patients to the most suitable trauma center, and may decrease intra-hospital mortality. We evaluated the performance of a pre-hospital procedure in a regional trauma system through measurements of the quality of pre-hospital medical assessment and the efficacy of a triage protocol.

METHODS

Our regional trauma system included 13 hospitals categorized as Level I, II or III trauma centers according to their technical facilities. Each patient was graded A, B or C by an emergency physician, according to the seriousness of their injuries at presentation on scene. The triage was performed according to this grading and the categorization of centers. This study is a registry analysis of a three-year period (2009 to 2011).

RESULTS

Of the 3,428 studied patients, 2,572 were graded using the pre-hospital grading system (Graded group). The pre-hospital gradation was closely related with injury severity score (ISS) and intra-hospital mortality rate. The triage protocol had a sensitivity of 92% (95% confidence interval (CI) 90% to 93%) and a specificity of 41% (95% CI 39% to 44%) to predict adequate admission of patients with ISS more than 15. A total of 856 patients were not graded at the scene (Non-graded group). Undertriage rate was significantly reduced in the Graded group compared with the Non-graded group, with a relative risk of 0.47 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.56) according to the definition of the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (P <0.001). Where adjusted for trauma severity, the expected mortality rate at discharge from hospital was higher than observed mortality, with a difference of +2.0% (95% CI 1.4 to 2.6%; P <0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a regional trauma system with a pre-hospital triage procedure was effective in detecting severe trauma patients and in lowering the rate of pre-hospital undertriage. A beneficial effect on outcome of such an organization is suggested.

Update on prehospital emergency care of severe trauma patients

The prognosis of severe trauma patients is determined by the ability of a healthcare system to provide high intensity therapeutic treatment on the field and to transport patients as quickly as possible to the structure best suited to their condition. Direct admission to a specialized center ("trauma center") reduces the mortality of the most severe trauma at 30 days and one year. Triage in a non-specialized hospital is a major risk of loss of chance and should be avoided whenever possible. Medical dispatching plays a major role in determining patient care. The establishment of a hospital care network is an important issue that is not formalized enough in France. The initial triage of severe trauma patients must be improved to avoid taking patients to hospitals that are not equipped to take care of them. For this purpose, the MGAP score can predict severity and help decide where to transport the patient. However, it does not help predict the need for urgent resuscitation procedures. Hemodynamic management is central to the care of hemorrhagic shock and severe head trauma. Transport helicopter with a physician on board has an important role to allow direct admission to a specialized center in geographical areas that are difficult to access.

The initial management of severe trauma patients at hospital admission

The initial management of trauma patient is a critical period aiming at: stabilizing the vital functions; following a rigorous injury assessment; defining a therapeutic strategy. This management has to be organized to minimize loss of time that would be deleterious for the patients outcome. Thus, before patient arrival, the trauma team alert should lead to the initiation of care procedures adapted to the announced severity of the patient. Moreover, each individual should know its role in advance and the team should be managed by only one individual (the trauma leader) to avoid conflicts of decision. A rapid trauma injury assessment aims not only at guiding resuscitation (chest drainage, pelvic contention, to define the mean arterial pressure goal) but also to decide a critical intervention in case of hemodynamic instability (laparotomy, thoracotomy, arterial embolisation). This initial assessment includes a chest and a pelvic X-ray, abdominal ultrasound (extended to the lung) and transcranial Doppler (TCD). The whole body scanner with administration of intravenous contrast material is the cornerstone of the injury assessment but can be done for patients stabilized after the initial resuscitation.

Outcomes of different health care contexts for direct transport to a trauma center versus initial secondary center care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Within a trauma system, pre-hospital care is the first step in managing the trauma patient. Timely and appropriate transport of the injured patient to the most appropriate facility is important. Many trauma systems mandate that serious trauma cases are transported directly to a level I trauma center unless transfer to a closer hospital is deemed necessary to resuscitate and stabilize the patient prior to onward transfer to definitive care. Statistical and clinical heterogeneity is often high and is likely to be influenced by the heath care context.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare patient outcomes for patients with serious trauma transported directly to a Level I/II trauma center ('direct' group) to those transported to a healthcare facility before transfer to the Level I/ II trauma center ('transfer' group). A search of bibliographic databases and secondary sources that focus on trauma was made. Studies were grouped by region: United States of America, Canada, Europe, Asia, Australia and New Zealand and South Africa.

RESULTS

The review included 43,554 patients from the 30 studies that met the selection criteria. Heterogeneity of the studies was high (I(2) 71%) overall but low for European, Asian, and Australian and New Zealand studies. There was considerable variation between studies in the structure, policies and practices of the respective trauma systems. The effect of "directness" on patient outcomes was inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

The current research evidence does not support nor refute a position that all serious trauma patients be routinely transported directly to a level I/II trauma center. As this is a complex issue, local health-care context and injury profile influence trauma policy and practice.

A comparison of adherence to correctly documented triage level of critically ill patients between emergency department and the ambulance service nurses

Priority or triage has always occurred in emergency care. Today it is performed by both nurses in emergency departments (EDs) and ambulance services (ASs) to ensure patient safety. Recent studies have shown that nurses are unlikely to change their first impressions and patients suffering from blunt trauma are undertriaged. Our study aimed to compare and evaluate the adherence to correct triage level documentation, between nurses in the ED and the AS, according to current regulations. Of 592 analysed triage records from a university, a central and a district hospital, the adherence was 64% by ED nurses and 43% by AS nurses (p<0.001), but individual percentages ranged from 27% to 88%. Patient safety is jeopardised when nurses do not adhere to the triage system and do not correctly document the triage level. Internal feedback and control are two approaches to improve the patient outcome, indicating that organisational actions must be taken.

The impact of distance on triage to trauma center care in an urban trauma system

BACKGROUND

Urban trauma systems are characterized by high population density, availability of trauma centers, and acceptable road transport times (within 30 minutes). In such systems, patients meeting field trauma triage (FTT) criteria should be transported directly to a trauma center, bypassing closer non-trauma centers.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated emergency medical services (EMS) triage practices to identify opportunities for improving care delivery.

OBJECTIVE

Specifically, we evaluated the effect of the additional distance to a trauma center, compared with a closer non-trauma center, on the noncompliance with trauma destination criteria by EMS personnel in an urban environment.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adults having at least one physiologic derangement and meeting Toronto EMS field trauma triage criteria from 2005 to 2010. Road travel distances between the site of injury, the closest non-trauma center, and the closest trauma center were estimated using geographic information systems. For patients who were transported to non-trauma centers, we estimated "differential distance": the additional travel distance required to transport directly to a trauma center. Logistic regression was used to analyze the effect of differential distance on triage decisions, adjusting for other patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Inclusion criteria identified 898 patients; 53% were transported directly to a trauma center. Falls, female gender, and age greater than 65 years were associated with transport to non-trauma centers. Differential distances greater than 1 mile were associated with a decreased likelihood of triage to a trauma center.

CONCLUSION

Differential distance between the closest non-trauma center and the closest trauma center was associated with lower compliance with triage protocols, even in an urban setting where trauma centers can be accessed within approximately 30 minutes. Our findings suggest that there are opportunities for reducing the gap between ideal and actual application of field trauma triage guidelines through a process of education and feedback.