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

Impact of subsidy policies on the financial status of trauma centers

Trauma centers (TCs) play a crucial role in improving patient safety of severely injured individuals, but require substantial financial resources to operate effectively. TCs in low-insured areas are particularly at risk of being confronted with financial deficits, and a threat of closure, due to the inability to recover costs from uncompensated care. While some states in the US provide financial subsidies to support these centers, the diversity of state subsidy policies and their impacts on TC financial viability are poorly understood. To address this, we introduce a generalized subsidy distribution formula that incorporates key components from various state policies. Based on that, we further propose a TC Financial Evaluation Model that employs Monte Carlo simulation to assess the effects of different subsidy policies along three proposed metrics. Utilizing realistic data from multiple US states and national insurance statistics, we conduct a comprehensive experimental study. Our findings suggest that the financial performance of TCs could be affected by the total subsidy amount, the Uninsured level within the Trauma Service Area (TSA), and the specific subsidy distribution policy employed. This research provides trauma decision-makers a quantitative tool to evaluate, compare, and design subsidy policies tailored to their unique demographic and economic contexts, potentially leading to a more standardized approach to mitigate existing policy disparities across states.

Geriatric trauma triage: optimizing systems for older adults-a publication of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Geriatric Trauma Committee

Background

Geriatric trauma patients are an increasing population of the United States (US), sustaining a high incidence of falls, and suffer greater morbidity and mortality to their younger counterparts. Significant variation and challenges exist to optimize outcomes for this cohort, while being mindful of available resources. This manuscript provides concise summary of locoregional and national practices, including relevant updates in the triage of geriatric trauma in an effort to synthesize the results and provide guidance for further investigation.

Methods

We conducted a review of geriatric triage in the United States (US) at multiple stages in the care of the older patient, evaluating existing literature and guidelines. Opportunities for improvement or standardization were identified.

Results

Opportunities for improved geriatric trauma triage exist in the pre-hospital setting, in the trauma bay, and continue after admission. They may include physiologic criteria, biochemical markers, radiologic criteria and even age. Recent Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) Best Practices Guidelines for Geriatric Trauma Management published in 2024 support these findings.

Conclusion

Trauma systems must adjust to provide optimal care for older adults. Further investigation is required to provide pertinent guidance.

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

Introduction

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Evaluation of mechanism of injury criteria for field triage of occupants involved in motor vehicle collisions

OBJECTIVE

The mechanism of injury (MOI) criteria assist in determining which patients are at high risk of severe injury and would benefit from direct transport to a trauma center. The goal of this study was to determine whether the prognostic performance of the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) MOI criteria for motor vehicle collisions (MVCs) has changed during the decade since the guidelines were approved. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the performance of these criteria for different age groups and evaluate potential criteria that are not currently in the guidelines.

METHODS

Data were obtained from NASS and Crash Investigation Sampling System (CISS) for 2000-2009 and 2010-2019. Cases missing injury severity were excluded, and all other missing data were imputed. The outcome of interest was Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥16. The area under the receiver operator characteristic (AUROC) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained from 1,000 bootstrapped samples using national case weights. The AUROC for the existing CDC MOI criteria were compared between the 2 decades. The performance of the criteria was also assessed for different age groups based on accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Potential new criteria were then evaluated when added to the current CDC MOI criteria.

RESULTS

There were 150,683 (weighted 73,423,189) cases identified for analysis. There was a small but statistically significant improvement in the AUROC of the MOI criteria in the later decade (2010-2019; AUROC = 0.77, 95% CI [0.76-0.78]) compared to the earlier decade (2000-2009; AUROC = 0.75, 95% CI [0.74-0.76]). The accuracy and specificity did not vary with age, but the sensitivity dropped significantly for older adults (0-18 years: 0.62, 19-54 years: 0.59, ≥55 years: 0.37, and ≥65 years: 0.36). The addition of entrapment improved the sensitivity of the existing criteria and was the only potential new criterion to maintain a sensitivity above 0.95.

CONCLUSIONS

The MOI criteria for MVCs in the current CDC guidelines still perform well even as vehicle design has changed. However, the sensitivity of these criteria for older adults is much lower than for younger occupants. The addition of entrapment improved sensitivity while maintaining high specificity and could be considered as a potential modification to current MOI criteria.