The predictive value of serum lactate to forecast injury severity in trauma-patients increases taking age into account

BACKGROUND

Two-tier trauma team activation (TTA)-protocols often fail to safely identify severely injured patients. A possible amendment to existing triage scores could be the measurement of serum lactate. The aim of this study was to determine the ability of the combination of serum lactate and age to predict severe injuries (ISS > 15).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a single level one trauma center in a 20 months study-period and analyzed every trauma team activation (TTA) due to the mechanism of injury (MOI). Primary endpoint was the correlation between serum lactate (and age) and ISS and mortality. The validity of lactate (LAC) and lactate contingent on age (LAC + AGE) were assessed using the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve. We used a logistic regression model to predict the probability of an ISS > 15.

RESULTS

During the study period we included 325 patients, 75 met exclusion criteria. Mean age was 43 years (Min.: 11, Max.: 90, SD: 18.7) with a mean ISS of 8.4 (SD: 8.99). LAC showed a sensitivity of 0.82 with a specificity of 0.62 with an optimal cutoff at 1.72 mmol/l to predict an ISS > 15. The AUC of the ROC for LAC was 0.764 (95% CI: 0.67-0.85). The LAC + AGE model provided a significantly improved predictive value compared to LAC (0.765 vs. 0.828, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The serum lactate concentration is able to predict injury severity. The prognostic value improves significantly taking the patients age into consideration. The combination of serum lactate and age could be a suitable Ad-on to existing two-tier triage protocols to minimize undertriage.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective cohort study.

Patient Outcomes Based on the 2011 CDC Guidelines for Field Triage of Injured Patients

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guidelines for Field Triage of Injured Patients drive the destination decision for millions of emergency medical services (EMS)-transported trauma patients annually, yet limited information exists regarding performance and relationship with patient outcomes as a whole.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of positive findings on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guidelines for Field Triage of Injured Patients with hospitalization and mortality.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all 911 responses from the 2019 ESO Data Collaborative research dataset with complete Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guidelines for Field Triage of Injured Patients and linked emergency department dispositions, excluding children and cardiac arrests prior to EMS arrival. Patients were categorized by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guidelines for Field Triage of Injured Patients step(s) met. Outcomes were hospitalization and emergency department or inhospital mortality.

RESULTS

There were 86,462 records included: n = 65,967 (76.3%) met no criteria, n = 16,443 (19.0%) met one step (n = 1,571 [9.6%] vitals, n = 1,030 [6.3%] anatomy of injury, n = 993 [6.0%] mechanism of injury, and n = 12,849 [78.1%] special considerations), and n = 4,052 (4.7%) met multiple. Compared with meeting no criteria, hospitalization odds increased threefold for vitals (odds ratio [OR]: 3.07, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.77-3.40), fourfold for anatomy of injury (OR: 3.94, 95% CI: 3.48-4.46), twofold for mechanism of injury (OR: 2.00, 95% CI: 1.74-2.29), or special considerations (OR: 2.46, 95% CI: 2.36-2.56). Hospitalization odds increased ninefold when positive in multiple steps (OR: 8.97, 95% CI: 8.37-9.62). Overall, n = 84,473 (97.7%) had mortality data available, and n = 886 (1.0%) died. When compared with meeting no criteria, mortality odds increased 10-fold when positive in vitals (OR: 9.58, 95% CI: 7.30-12.56), twofold for anatomy of injury (OR: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.28-4.29), or special considerations (OR: 2.10, 95% CI: 1.71-2.60). There was no difference when only positive for mechanism of injury (OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.03-1.54). Mortality odds increased 23-fold when positive in multiple steps (OR: 22.7, 95% CI: 19.7-26.8).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients meeting multiple Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guidelines for Field Triage of Injured Patients steps were at greater risk of hospitalization and death. When meeting only one step, anatomy of injury was associated with greater risk of hospitalization; vital sign criteria were associated with greater risk of mortality.

Low-value injury admissions in an integrated Canadian trauma system: A multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Injury represents 260 000 hospitalisations and $27 billion in healthcare costs each year in Canada. Evidence suggests that there is significant variation in the prevalence of hospital admissions among emergency department presentations between countries and providers, but we lack data specific to injury admissions. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of potentially low-value injury admissions following injury in a Canadian provincial trauma system, identify diagnostic groups contributing most to low-value admissions and assess inter-hospital variation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicentre cohort study based on all injury admissions in the Québec trauma system (2013-2018). Using literature and expert consultation, we developed criteria to identify potentially low-value injury admissions. We used a multilevel logistic regression model to evaluate inter-hospital variation in the prevalence of low-value injury admissions with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). We stratified our analyses by age (1-15; 16-64; 65-74; 75+ years).

RESULTS

The prevalence of low-value injury admissions was 16% (n = 19 163) among all patients, 26% (2136) in children, 11% (4695) in young adults and 19% (12 345) in older adults. Diagnostic groups contributing most to low-value admissions were mild traumatic brain injury in children (48% of low-value paediatric injury admissions; n = 922), superficial injuries (14%, n = 660) or minor spinal injuries (14%, n = 634) in adults aged 16-64 and superficial injuries in adults aged 65+ (22%, n = 2771). We observed strong inter-hospital variation in the prevalence of low-value injury admissions (ICC = 37%).

CONCLUSION

One out of six hospital admissions following injury may be of low value. Children with mild traumatic brain injury and adults with superficial injuries could be good targets for future research efforts seeking to reduce healthcare services overuse. Inter-hospital variation indicates there may be an opportunity to reduce low-value injury admissions with appropriate interventions targeting modifications in care processes.

Suspicion of abdominal injuries in high-energy trauma patients: which clinical factors influence decision making for diagnostic imaging?

Background: The choice of diagnostic imaging for high-energy trauma (HET) patients is highly debated. Currently, different diagnostic imaging is used in trauma centres to identify abdominal injuries. However, it remains unclear when physicians have a suspicion for abdominal injuries, and when diagnostic imaging is performed. Over-triage may lead to unnecessary diagnostics in relatively minor injured HET-patients.Purpose: We investigated which clinical factors influence the decision to perform a focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) or abdominal computed tomography (CT) in HET-patients. Additionally, we investigated which clinical factors determined whether HET-patients were admitted to the hospital or discharged from the emergency department.Methods: We performed a retrospective data analysis of all HET-patients in a single level II trauma centre in the Netherlands, between June 2015 and January 2017.Results: 316 HET-patients were included in this study. We found two clinical factors that proved to significantly predict whether a FAST or abdominal CT was performed: abdominal pain and the degree of concomitant injury. Furthermore, we found that the degree of concomitant injury as well as low haemoglobin levels proved to significantly predict whether a patient was admitted to the hospital for observation.Conclusion: This study clarifies on which clinical factors the decision is taken to perform diagnostic imaging to identify abdominal injuries. Future prospective multicentre studies should clarify whether these clinical factors are trustworthy predictors of abdominal injuries, and whether patients can safely be discharged after trauma work-up.

Sensitivity and specificity of trauma team activation protocol criteria in an Italian trauma center: A retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The trauma team (TT) model could reduce mortality, morbidity, and duration of hospital stay, costs, and complications. To avoid over- or undertriage for trauma team activation, robust criteria have to be chosen.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of a TT activation protocol for major trauma patients to predict the need for emergency treatment.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was carried out in the Emergency Department (ED) of a major Italian trauma center. Patients with trauma or burns who accessed the ED in 2015 with a triage red or yellow priority treatment code were included, while pediatric patients were excluded. Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were calculated for each TT activation criteria and the aggregated criteria.

RESULTS

Data from 240 patients were collected: 40.42% of patients had a congruent triage while 50% were overtriaged and 9.58% undertriaged. A correct triage led to a lower hospital stay (p < 0.01), while undertriage was not associated with patients' death (p = 0.16). All criteria had a specificity higher than 95%, a total sensitivity of 80.83% and a total positive predictive value of 43.49%.

CONCLUSION

This study highlighted that the TT activation criteria had high specificity and sensitivity, while the positive predictive value of the criteria was lower. Mechanisms of injury criteria were less specific and sensitive in detecting the TT activation correctly. As nurses play a pivotal role in the triage of traumatized patients and the TT, reduction of under- and overtriage is essential to improve the patients' health outcome.

The performance of trauma team activation criteria at an Australian regional hospital

OBJECTIVE

It is common practice for hospitals to use a trauma team activation criteria (TTAC) to identify patients at risk of major trauma and to activate a multidisciplinary team to receive such patients on arrival to the ED. The aims of this study are to describe the frequency of individual criteria and the ability of one currently used system to predict major trauma, and to estimate the effect of simplified criteria on the prediction.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A retrospective observational study of the entire cohort of adult patients who a) received trauma team activation or b) were included in the trauma registry of Royal Darwin Hospital in 2015. From the original clinical record all components of the TTAC, and corresponding outcomes, were extracted for each case. The predictive effect of each criterion, adjusted for the presence of others, was assessed by logistic regression. The poorest predictors were sequentially "dropped" to develop a number of models of which the predictive value of the resulting hypothetical TTAC was calculated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Major trauma (MT) was defined as a death in ED, immediate operative intervention or direct admission to ICU. Overtriage was defined as activation of the trauma team without major trauma. Undertriage was defined as major trauma without trauma team activation.

RESULTS

794 trauma presentations were reviewed, 428 of those presentations met TTAC. Major trauma was present in 135 (32%) of those with TTAC hence overtriage was 68%. Criteria based on mechanism of injury (MOI) were responsible for over half of the overtriage and were collectively present without other activation criteria in only 10 MTs (6%). Removal of the criteria with the worst predictive value decreased overtriage to 50% before a rise in undertriage to beyond 24%.

CONCLUSION

A number of criteria including those based on MOI decrease the accuracy of TTAC and lead to high rates of overtriage. Airway, respiratory and neurological compromise were the best predictors of MT. Any criteria simplification should be introduced in the context of a further audit of TTAC performance, as the estimates of the separate criteria in the current TTAC are not robustto bias or to undetected correlation.

Trauma System Overtriage: Are We on Track?

The American College of Surgeons (ACS) recommends trauma overtriage rate (OT) below 50 per cent to maximize efficiency while ensuring optimal care. This retrospective study was undertaken to evaluate OT rates in our Level I trauma center using the most recent criteria and guidelines. OT rates during a 12-month period were measured using six definitions based on combinations of Injury Severity Score (ISS), length of hospital stay (LOS, in days), procedures, and disposition after the emergency department. Reason for trauma activation was 55 per cent criteria, 16 per cent guidelines, 11 per cent paramedic judgment, five per cent no reason, and 13 per cent no documentation. OT rates ranged from 22.6 per cent (ISS less than 9, LOS 1 day or less, no consults) to 48.2 per cent (ISS less than 9, LOS 3 days or less, with procedures/consults) and were in compliance with ACS recommendations. Physiologic assessment criteria and anatomic injury had the lowest OT rates and contained all mortalities. Passenger space intrusion (PSI), pedestrian versus automobile (criterion and guideline), and extrication (guideline) all had consistently high rates of OT. We conclude that PSI should be reduced to a guideline, the pedestrian versus automobile criterion and guideline should be combined, and extrication could be removed from the triage scheme.