Undertriage of Trauma-Related Deaths in U.S. Emergency Departments

Pediatric Triage Accuracy in Pediatric and General Emergency Departments

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Accurate triage at the time of emergency department (ED) presentation is critical for timely acuity assessment and anticipating resource requirements. Commonly, triage is conducted using the Emergency Severity Index (ESI); however, the accuracy of this approach for children in general EDs is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to quantify pediatric triage accuracy in a national sample of ED visits and evaluate whether presentation to a pediatric vs general ED is associated with mistriage.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study of the 2017-2021 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey of pediatric (aged <18 years) ED visits with an ESI score from 3 to 5. The outcome was mistriage (resource utilization discordant with ESI prediction). Standardized ESI definitions were applied to count resources. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate whether presentation to a pediatric or general ED was associated with triage accuracy.

RESULTS

Of 149 million visits, mistriage occurred in 53.7% of ESI 3, 57.7% of ESI 4, and 22.9% of ESI 5 visits. Children in general EDs were more likely to be mistriaged than children in pediatric EDs (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95% CI, 1.11-1.50). Young age was associated with mistriage (aged <1 year vs aged 13-17: adjusted OR [95% CI], 2.42 [2.00-2.94], 1-5 years: 1.79 [1.53-2.10], 6-12 years: 1.38 [1.16-1.64]).

CONCLUSION

Mistriage was common among children with an initial ESI of 3 to 5 and more common among children visiting general EDs. Our findings highlight the need for improved resource prediction at the time of triage.

Association of sociodemographic characteristics with the timeliness of surgery for patients with open tibial fractures

BACKGROUND

The American College of Surgeons recommends operative debridement of open tibial fractures within 24 h of presentation. It is unknown what the compliance rates are with this recommendation and what factors contribute to delays to operation.

METHODS

To determine the characteristics associated with delays to operation for open tibial fractures, we conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program data from 2017 to 2021. Individuals aged 18 and older presenting to a trauma center with an open tibial fracture were included. Associations were determined with a hierarchal regression model nesting patients within facilities.

RESULTS

Of the 24,102 patients presenting to 491 trauma centers, 66.3 % identified as White, 21.7 % as Black, 1.5 % as Asian, 1.1 % as American Indian, and 10.6 % as Other race. In total, 15.8 % identified as Hispanic. Patients were most often men (75.9 %) and privately insured (47.6 %). The median time to OR was 10.2 h (IQR 4.4-17.7) with 84.6 % receiving surgery within 24 h. In adjusted analyses, Black and American Indian patients had 5.5 % (CI 1.3 %-9.9 %) and 17.8 % (CI 2.2 %-35.8 %) longer wait times, respectively, and a decreased odds of receiving surgery within 24 h (AOR 0.85, CI 0.8-0.9; AOR 0.69, CI 0.5-0.9) when compared to White patients. Female patients had 6.5 % (CI 3.0 %-10.2 %) longer wait times than men. Patients with Medicaid had 5.5 % (CI 1.2 %-9.9 %) longer wait times than those with private insurance. Greater time to OR was associated with increasing age (p < 0.001), increasing injury severity (p < 0.001), and the presence of altered mentation (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We identified longer wait times to operative irrigation and debridement of open tibial fractures for Black and American Indian patients, women, and those with Medicaid. The implementation of health equity focused quality metrics may be necessary to achieve equity in trauma care.

American Trauma Care: A System of Systems

OBJECTIVE

The benefits of organized trauma systems have been well-documented during 50 years of trauma system development in the United States. Unfortunately, despite this evidence, trauma system development has occurred only sporadically in the 50 states.

METHODS

The relevant literature related to trauma system design and development was reviewed based on relevance to the study. Information from these sources was summarized into a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis.

RESULTS

Strengths discovered were leadership brought forth by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma and meaningful change generated from The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report addressing the fractionation of the nation's trauma systems, whereas weaknesses included patient outcome disparities due to the lack of a national governing authority, undertriage, underresourced rural trauma, and underfunded trauma research. Opportunities included the creation of level IV trauma centers; telemedicine; the development of rural trauma management courses; air medical transport to bring high-intensity care to the patient, particularly in rural areas; trauma research; and trauma prevention through outreach and educational programs. The following threats were determined: mass casualty incidents, motor vehicle collisions because of the high rate of motor vehicle collision deaths in the United States relative to other developed countries, and underfunded trauma systems.

CONCLUSION

Much work remains to be done in the development of an American trauma system. Recommendations include implementation of trauma care governance at the federal level; national oversight and support of emergency medical services systems, particularly in rural areas with strict reporting processes for emergency medical services programs; national organization of our mass casualty response; increased federal and state funding allocated to trauma centers; a consistent model for trauma system development; and trauma research.

An Analysis of Injured Patients Treated at Level 1 Trauma Centers Versus Other Centers: A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Trauma systems continue to evolve to create the best outcomes possible for patients who have undergone traumatic injury.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to evaluate the existing research on outcomes based on field triage to a Level 1 trauma center (L1TC) compared to other levels of hospitals and nontrauma centers.

METHODS

A structured literature search was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and the Cochrane Database. Studies analyzing measures of morbidity, mortality, and cost after receiving care at L1TCs compared to lower-level trauma centers and nontrauma centers in the United States and Canada were included. Three independent reviewers reviewed abstracts, and two independent reviewers conducted full-text review and quality assessment of the included articles.

RESULTS

Twelve thousand five hundred fourteen unique articles were identified using the literature search. 61 relevant studies were included in this scoping review. 95.2% of included studies were national or regional studies, and 96.8% were registry-based studies. 72.6% of included studies adjusted their results to account for injury severity. The findings from receiving trauma care at L1TCs vary depending on severity of injury, type of injury sustained, and patient characteristics. Existing literature suffers from limitations inherent to large de-identified databases, making record linkage between hospitals impossible.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review shows that the survival benefit of L1TC care is largest for patients with the most severe injuries. This scoping review demonstrates that further research using high-quality data is needed to elucidate more about how to structure trauma systems to improve outcomes for patients with different severities of injuries and in different types of facilities.

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.

Disparities in Emergency Medical Services Care Delivery in the United States: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Emergency medical services (EMS) often serve as the first medical contact for ill or injured patients, representing a critical access point to the health care delivery continuum. While a growing body of literature suggests inequities in care within hospitals and emergency departments, limited research has comprehensively explored disparities related to patient demographic characteristics in prehospital care.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to summarize the existing literature on disparities in prehospital care delivery for patients identifying as members of an underrepresented race, ethnicity, sex, gender, or sexual orientation group.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed (gray) literature. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Proquest Dissertations, Scopus, Google, and professional websites for studies set in the U.S. between 1960 and 2021. Each abstract and full-text article was screened by two reviewers. Studies written in English that addressed the underrepresented groups of interest and investigated EMS-related encounters were included. Studies were excluded if a disparity was noted incidentally but was not a stated objective or discussed. Data extraction was conducted using a standardized electronic form. Results were summarized qualitatively using an inductive approach.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five full-text articles from the peer-reviewed literature and two articles from the gray literature met inclusion criteria: 25 studies investigated sex/gender, 61 studies investigated race/ethnicity, and 58 studies investigated both. One study investigated sexual orientation. The most common health conditions evaluated were out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (n = 50), acute coronary syndrome (n = 36), and stroke (n = 31). The phases of EMS care investigated included access (n = 55), pre-arrival care (n = 46), diagnosis/treatment (n = 42), and response/transport (n = 40), with several studies covering multiple phases. Disparities were identified related to all phases of EMS care for underrepresented groups, including symptom recognition, pain management, and stroke identification. The gray literature identified public perceptions of EMS clinicians' cultural competency and the ability to appropriately care for transgender patients in the prehospital setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing research highlights health disparities in EMS care delivery throughout multiple health outcomes and phases of EMS care. Future research is needed to identify structured mechanisms to eliminate disparities, address clinician bias, and provide high-quality equitable care for all patient populations.

Sex-Based Disparities in Timeliness of Trauma Care and Discharge Disposition

Importance

Differences in time to diagnostic and therapeutic measures can contribute to disparities in outcomes. However, whether there is an association of timeliness by sex for trauma patients is unknown.

Objective

To investigate whether sex-based differences in time to definitive interventions exist for trauma patients in the US and whether these differences are associated with outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted from July 2020 to July 2021, using the 2013 to 2016 Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) databases from level I to III trauma centers in the US. Patients 18 years or older with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) greater than 15 and who carried diagnoses of traumatic brain injury, intra-abdominal injury, pelvic fracture, femur fracture, and spinal injury as a result of their trauma were included in the study. Data were analyzed from July 2020 to July 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes assessed timeliness to interventions, using Wilcoxon signed rank and χ2 tests. Secondary outcomes included location of discharge after injury, using propensity score-matched generalized estimating equations modeling.

Results

Of the 28 332 patients included, 20 002 (70.6%) were male patients (mean [SD] age, 43.3 [18.2] years) and 8330 (29.4%) were female patients (mean [SD] age, 48.5 [21.1] years), with significantly different distributions of ISS scores (ISS score 16-24: male patient, 10 622 [53.1%]; female patient, 4684 [56.2%]; ISS score 41-74: male patient, 2052 [10.3%]; female patient, 852 [10.2%]). Male patients more frequently had abdominal (4257 [21.3%] vs 1268 [15.2%]) and spinal cord (3989 [20.0%] vs 1274 [15.3%]) injuries, whereas female patients experienced greater proportions of femur (3670 [44.0%] vs 8422 [42.1%]) and pelvic (3970 [47.6%] vs 6963 [34.8%]) fractures. Female patients experienced significantly longer emergency department length of stay (median [IQR], 184 [92-314] minutes vs 172 [86-289] minutes; P < .001), longer time in pretriage (median [IQR], 52 [36-80] minutes vs 49 [34-77] minutes; P < .001), and increased likelihood of discharge to nursing or long-term care facilities instead of home after matching by age, ISS, mechanism, and injury type (male patient:female patient, odds ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.67-0.78).

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this cohort study suggest that female trauma patients experienced slightly longer delays in trauma care and had a higher likelihood of discharge to long-term care facilities than their male counterparts.

Extending Trauma Quality Improvement Beyond Trauma Centers: Hospital Variation in Outcomes Among Nontrauma Hospitals

OBJECTIVE

The American College of Surgeons (ACS) conducts a robust quality improvement program for ACS-verified trauma centers, yet many injured patients receive care at non-accredited facilities. This study tested for variation in outcomes across non-trauma hospitals and characterized hospitals associated with increased mortality.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The study included state trauma registry data of 37,670 patients treated between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2015. Clinical data were supplemented with data from the American Hospital Association and US Department of Agriculture, allowing comparisons among 100 nontrauma hospitals.

METHODS

Using Bayesian techniques, risk-adjusted and reliability-adjusted rates of mortality and interfacility transfer, as well as Emergency Departments length-of-stay (ED-LOS) among patients transferred from EDs were calculated for each hospital. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients ages >55 years and those with decreased Glasgow coma scores (GCS). Multiple imputation was used to address missing data.

RESULTS

Mortality varied 3-fold (0.9%-3.1%); interfacility transfer rates varied 46-fold (2.1%-95.6%); and mean ED-LOS varied 3-fold (81-231 minutes). Hospitals that were high and low statistical outliers were identified for each outcome, and subgroup analyses demonstrated comparable hospital variation. Metropolitan hospitals were associated increased mortality [odds ratio (OR) 1.7, P = 0.004], decreased likelihood of interfacility transfer (OR 0.7, P ≤ 0.001), and increased ED-LOS (coef. 0.1, P ≤ 0.001) when compared with nonmetropolitan hospitals and risk-adjusted.

CONCLUSIONS

Wide variation in trauma outcomes exists across nontrauma hospitals. Efforts to improve trauma quality should include engagement of nontrauma hospitals to reduce variation in outcomes of injured patients treated at those facilities.

Elevated serum lactate levels and age are associated with an increased risk for severe injury in trauma team activation due to trauma mechanism

BACKGROUND

The identification of risk factors for severe injury is crucial in trauma triage and trauma team activation (TTA) depends on a sufficient triage. The aim of this study was to determine whether or not elevated serum lactate levels and age are risk factors for severe injury in TTA due to trauma mechanism.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a single level one trauma center between September 2019 and May 2021 and analysed every TTA due to trauma mechanism. Primary endpoint of interest was the association of serum lactate as well as age with injury severity assessed by the injury severity score (ISS).

RESULTS

During the study period, we included 250 patients. Mean age was 43.3 years (Min.: 11, Max.: 90, SD: 18.7) and the initial lactate level was 1.7 mmol/L (SD: 0.95) with a mean ISS of 8.4 (SD: 8.99). The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for age > 65 being associated with an ISS > 16 is 9.7 (p < 0.001; 95% CI 4.01-25.58) and for lactate > 2.2 mmol/L being associated with an ISS > 16 is 6.29 (p < 0.001; 95% CI 2.93-13.48). A lactate level of > 4 mmol/L results in a 36-fold higher risk of severe injury with an ISS > 16 (OR 36.06; 95% CI 4-324.29).

CONCLUSION

This study identifies age (> 65) and lactate (> 2.2 mmol/L) as independent risk factors for severe injury in a TTA due to trauma mechanism. Existing triage protocols might benefit from congruous amendments.

Prehospital Trauma Care in Disasters and Other Mass Casualty Incidents - A Proposal for Hospital-Based Special Medical Response Teams

Current mass casualty incident (MCI) response in the United States calls for rapid deployment of first responders, such as law enforcement, fire, and emergency medical services personnel, to the incident and simultaneous activation of trauma center disaster protocols. Past investigations demonstrated that the incorporation of advanced trauma-trained physicians and paramedics into prehospital teams resulted in improved mortality during routine emergency medical care in Europe and in the combat setting. To date, limited research exists on the incorporation of advanced trauma-trained physicians and paramedics into prehospital teams for civilian MCIs. We proposed the concept of Special Medical Response Teams, which would rapidly deploy advanced trauma-trained physicians and paramedics to deliver a higher level of medical and surgical care in the prehospital setting during civilian mass casualty incidents.

A Multistate Study of Race and Ethnic Disparities in Access to Trauma Care

BACKGROUND

There are well-documented disparities in outcomes for injured Black and Hispanic patients in the United States. However, patient level characteristics cannot fully explain the differences in outcomes and system-level factors, including the trauma center designation of the hospital to which a patient presents, may contribute to their worse outcomes. We aim to determine if Black and Hispanic patients are more likely to be undertriaged, compared with white patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, cross-sectional, population-based study that uses data from the 2014 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Healthcare Costs and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases. We included data from all states with available State Inpatient Databases data that included both race and hospital characteristics needed for analysis (n = 18). Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of severely injured (Injury Severity Score ≥16) patients being brought to a trauma center.

RESULTS

We identified 70,970 severely injured trauma patients with complete data. Non-Hispanic White represented 74.1% of the study population, 9.8% were non-Hispanic Black, and 9.7% were Hispanic. After adjustment for other demographic and injury characteristics, Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients were more likely to be undertriaged, compared with white patients (odds ratio, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.29 and odds ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-1.48, respectively). Male sex and older age were associated with higher odds of undertriage, whereas urban residence, high injury severity, and penetrating injury were associated with lower odds of undertriage.

CONCLUSIONS

Severely injured Black and Hispanic trauma patients are more likely to be undertriaged than otherwise similar white patients. The factors that contribute to racial and ethnic disparities in receiving trauma center care need to be identified and addressed to provide equitable trauma care.

Mortality of trauma patients treated at trauma centers compared to non-trauma centers in Sweden: a retrospective study

Objective

The main objective was to compare the 30-day mortality rate of trauma patients treated at trauma centers as compared to non-trauma centers in Sweden. The secondary objective was to evaluate how injury severity influences the potential survival benefit of specialized care.

Methods

This retrospective study included 29,864 patients from the national Swedish Trauma Registry (SweTrau) during the period 2013–2017. Three sampling exclusion criteria were applied: (1) Injury Severity Score (ISS) of zero; (2) missing data in any variable of interest; (3) data falling outside realistic values and duplicate registrations. University hospitals were classified as trauma centers; other hospitals as non-trauma centers. Logistic regression was used to analyze the effect of trauma center care on mortality rate, while adjusting for other factors potentially affecting the risk of death.

Results

Treatment at a trauma center in Sweden was associated with a 41% lower adjusted 30-day mortality (odds ratio 0.59 [0.50–0.70], p < 0.0001) compared to non-trauma center care, considering all injured patients (ISS ≥ 1). The potential survival benefit increased substantially with higher injury severity, with up to > 70% mortality decrease for the most critically injured group (ISS ≥ 50).

Conclusions

There exists a potentially substantial survival benefit for trauma patients treated at trauma centers in Sweden, especially for the most severely injured. This study motivates a critical review and possible reorganization of the national trauma system, and further research to identify the characteristics of patients in most need of specialized care.

Use of 911 for Rapid Re-Triage of Critical Trauma Patients

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a 911 trauma re-triage protocol implemented at a new community hospital in a region with a high volume of trauma and frequent transports by private vehicle.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included all trauma patients ≥15 years old transferred via 911 trauma re-triage from a new community hospital over a 10-month period from August 2015 through April 2016. Criteria for 911 trauma re-triage were developed with input from local Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and trauma experts. An educational module, along with the criteria and implementation steps, was distributed to the emergency department (ED) personnel at the community hospital. Data were abstracted from the regional trauma registry, and the EMS patient care records were reviewed. Primary outcomes were: (1) median total transport time; and (2) proportion of patients who met the 911 re-triage criteria.

RESULTS

During the study period, 32 patients with traumatic injuries were transferred via 911 re-triage to the closest trauma center (TC). The median age of patients was 31 years (IQR 24-45 years) with 78% male and 66% suffering from a penetrating mechanism. The median prehospital provider scene time was 10 minutes (IQR 8-12 minutes) and transport time was seven minutes (IQR 6-9 minutes). Median total transport time was 17 minutes (IQR 15-20 minutes). Seventeen patients (53%) met 911 re-triage criteria as determined by study investigators. The most common criteria met was "penetrating injury to the head, neck, or torso" in 14 cases.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that 911 re-triage was a feasible strategy to expeditiously transfer critical trauma patients to a TC within a mature trauma system in an urban-suburban setting with a median total transport time of 17 minutes.

An analysis of pediatric trauma center undertriage in a mature trauma system

BACKGROUND

Improved mortality as a result of appropriate triage has been well established in adult trauma and may be generalizable to the pediatric trauma population as well. We sought to determine the overall undertriage rate (UTR) in the pediatric trauma population within Pennsylvania (PA). We hypothesized that a significant portion of pediatric trauma population would be undertriaged.

METHODS

All pediatric (age younger than 15) admissions meeting trauma criteria (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision: 800-959) from 2003 to 2015 were extracted from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council (PHC4) database and the Pennsylvania Trauma Systems Foundation (PTSF) registry. Undertriage was defined as patients not admitted to PTSF-verified pediatric trauma centers (n = 6). The PHC4 contains inpatient admissions within PA, while PTSF only reports admissions to PA trauma centers. ArcGIS Desktop was used for geospatial mapping of undertriage.

RESULTS

A total of 37,607 cases in PTSF and 63,954 cases in PHC4 met criteria, suggesting UTR of 45.8% across PA. Geospatial mapping reveals significant clusters of undertriage regions with high UTR in the eastern half of the state compared to low UTR in the western half. High UTR seems to be centered around nonpediatric facilities. The UTR for patients with a probability of death 1% or less was 39.2%.

CONCLUSION

Undertriage is clustered in eastern PA, with most areas of high undertriage located around existing trauma centers in high-density population areas. This pattern may suggest pediatric undertriage is related to a system issue as opposed to inadequate access.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective study, without negative criteria, Level III.

Filled to the brim: The characteristics of over-triage at a level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

Interfacility transfers are necessary and valuable for the trauma system, but despite regional guidelines, many patients are inappropriately transferred. We evaluated over-triage at our Level I center and identified risk factors for over-triage.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis at our Level I urban trauma center assessed patients transferred from regional facilities during 2017. Over-triage was defined as patients discharged <48 h without procedures. Exclusion criteria were leaving against medical advice or no outside records.

RESULTS

Overall, 2352 patients met criteria. Nine hundred thirty (39.5%) with complete hospital records were discharged in <48 h; 498 (53.5%) received no procedural intervention and 909 (97.7%) were ultimately discharged home.

CONCLUSION

Many patients are inappropriately transferred to tertiary care centers without a definitive need for advanced services. Studies are needed to improve triage criteria without increasing under-triage.

Association of Race/Ethnicity With Emergency Department Destination of Emergency Medical Services Transport

IMPORTANCE

Evidence from national studies indicates systematic differences in hospitals in which racial/ethnic minorities receive care, with most care obtained in a small proportion of hospitals. Little is known about the source of these differences.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the patterns of emergency department (ED) destination of emergency medical services (EMS) transport according to patient race/ethnicity, and to compare the patterns between those transported by EMS and those who did not use EMS.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study of US EMS and EDs used Medicare claims data from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2012. Enrollees aged 66 years or older with continuous fee-for-service Medicare coverage (N = 864 750) were selected for the sample. Zip codes with a sizable count (>10) of Hispanic, non-Hispanic black, and non-Hispanic white enrollees were used for comparison of EMS use across racial/ethnic subgroups. Data on all ED visits, with and without EMS use, were obtained. Data analysis was performed from December 18, 2018, to July 7, 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome measure was whether an EMS transport destination was the most frequent ED destination among white patients (reference ED). The secondary outcomes were (1) whether the ED destination was a safety-net hospital and (2) the distance of EMS transport from the ED destination.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 864 750 Medicare enrollees from 4175 selected zip codes who had 458 701 ED visits using EMS transport. Of these EMS-transported enrollees, 26.1% (127 555) were younger than 75 years, and most were women (302 430 [66.8%]). Overall, the proportion of white patients transported to the reference ED was 61.3% (95% CI, 61.0% to 61.7%); this rate was lower among black enrollees (difference of -5.3%; 95% CI, -6.0% to -4.6%) and Hispanic enrollees (difference of -2.5%; 95% CI, -3.2% to -1.7%). A similar pattern was found among patients with high-risk acute conditions; the proportion transported to the reference ED was 61.5% (95% CI, 60.7% to 62.2%) among white enrollees, whereas this proportion was lower among black enrollees (difference of -6.7%; 95% CI, -8.3% to -5.0%) and Hispanic enrollees (difference of -2.6%; 95% CI, -4.5% to -0.7%). In major US cities, a larger black-white discordance in ED destination was observed (-9.3%; 95% CI, -10.9% to -7.7%). Black and Hispanic patients were more likely to be transported to a safety-net ED compared with their white counterparts; the proportion transported to a safety-net ED among white enrollees (18.5%; 95% CI, 18.1% to 18.7%) was lower compared with that among black enrollees (difference of 2.7%; 95% CI, 2.2% to 3.2%) and Hispanic enrollees (difference of 1.9%; 95% CI, 1.3% to 2.4%). Concordance rates of non-EMS-transported ED visits were statistically significantly lower than for EMS-transported ED visits; the concordance rate among white enrollees of 52.9% (95% CI, 52.1% to 53.6%) was higher compared with that among black enrollees (difference of -4.8%; 95% CI, -6.4% to -3.3%) and Hispanic enrollees (difference of -3.0%; 95% CI, -4.7% to -1.3%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found race/ethnicity variation in ED destination for patients using EMS transport, with black and Hispanic patients more likely to be transported to a safety-net hospital ED compared with white patients living in the same zip code.

Comparing the Accuracy of Mass Casualty Triage Systems When Used in an Adult Population

Objective: To use a previously published criterion standard to compare the accuracy of 4 different mass casualty triage systems (Sort, Assess, Lifesaving Interventions, Treatment/Transport [SALT], Simple Triage and Rapid Treatment [START], Triage Sieve, and CareFlight) when used in an emergency department-based adult population. Methods: We performed a prospective, observational study of a convenience sample of adults aged 18 years or older presenting to a single tertiary care hospital emergency department. A co-investigator with prior emergency medical services (EMS) experience observed each subject's initial triage in the emergency department and recorded all data points necessary to assign a triage category using each of the 4 mass casualty triage systems being studied. Subjects' medical records were reviewed after their discharge from the hospital to assign the "correct" triage category using the criterion standard. The 4 mass casualty triage system assignments were then compared to the "correct" assignment. Descriptive statistics were used to compare accuracy and over- and under-triage rates for each triage system. Results: A total of 125 subjects were included in the study. Of those, 53% were male and 59% were transported by private vehicle. When compared to the criterion standard definitions, SALT was found to have the highest accuracy rate (52%; 95% CI 43-60) compared to START (36%; 95% CI 28-44), CareFlight (36%; 95% CI 28-44), and TriageSieve (37%; 95% CI 28-45). SALT also had the lowest under-triage rate (26%; 95% CI 19-34) compared to START (57%; 95% CI 48-66), CareFlight (58%; 95% CI 49-66), and TriageSieve (58%; 95% CI 49-66). SALT had the highest over-triage rate (22%; 95% CI 14-29) compared to START (7%; 95% CI 3-12), CareFlight (6%; 95% CI 2-11) and TriageSieve (6%; 95% CI 2-11). Conclusion: We found that SALT triage most often correctly triaged adult emergency department patients when compared to a previously published criterion standard. While there are no target under- and over-triage rates that have been published for mass casualty triage, all 4 systems had relatively high rates of under-triage.

Development of Trauma Level Prediction Models Using Emergency Medical Service Vital Signs to Reduce Over- and Undertriage Rates in Penetrating Wounds and Falls of the Elderly

Determining triage activation levels in geriatric patients who fall (GF), and patients with penetrating wounds can be difficult and inaccurate, resulting in excessive overtriage (OT) and undertriage (UT) rates. We developed trauma activation prediction models using field data to predict with greater accuracy trauma activation level and triage rates consistent with the ACS recommendations. Using data from the 2014 National Trauma Data Bank, we created binary regression equations for each type of injury (GF and penetrating wounds). The 2014 data were randomized and divided into two halves. The first half for each injury type was used to generate prediction models, whereas the second half of the 2014 data were combined with 2013 and 2015 National Trauma Data Bank data for model verification. Binary regression equations were generated from vital signs collected by EMS. A Cribari grid with ISS ≥ 15 was used to determine the appropriateness of activation level. Chi-square analysis was used to determine significant differences between OT, UT, and accuracy predictions. Using our triage models, we were able to obtain UTrates of less than 4 per cent for GF with OT rates of less than 40 per cent, UT rates less than 4.1 per cent and OT of less than 50 per cent for patients with gunshot wounds, and UTrates less than 4 per cent and OT rates less than 25 per cent for patients who had stab wounds. Our developed trauma level prediction models enable health providers to predict trauma activation levels that can result in OT and UT rates in the recommended ranges by the ACS.

Evaluation of Trauma Triage Criteria Performance in a Regional Trauma System

Objective: We evaluated the performance of individual trauma triage criteria using data from a regional trauma registry. Methods: Los Angeles County (LAC) paramedics use triage criteria adapted from the 2011 Center for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines to triage injured patients to Trauma Centers (TCs). TCs report outcomes to a LAC EMS registry. We abstracted data for patients 15 years or older from 2013 to 2015 and identified all trauma triage criteria that were met for each encounter. Study outcomes were: (1) "clear need" for a TC, defined as receiving a non-orthopedic operative intervention within 6 hours of arrival, injury severity score (ISS) > 15, or surgical ICU admission; or (2) "no need" for a TC, defined as discharge home from the emergency department (ED). We also defined "possible need" as those patients not discharged home from the ED, inclusive of "clear need" and all other admitted patients. For each individual triage criteria, we calculated the positive likelihood ratios and positive predictive values for TC need. Results: There were 71,536 adult patients in the registry transported by EMS to a LAC TC during the study. Median age was 38 years (IQR 25-55) with 73% male. There were 23,628 (33%) who met "no need" criteria for a TC, leaving 47,908 (67%) patients with "possible need" for a TC, of whom 13,343 patients (19% of total) met "clear need" for a TC. No individual trauma criterion met the a priori likelihood ratio threshold of 10 for predicting "clear need" for a TC. Cardiopulmonary arrest with penetrating torso trauma and flail chest met this threshold for "possible need." Conclusion: In this retrospective analysis, no individual triage criterion definitively identified patients who benefit from transport to a TC. Yet, the majority of patients demonstrated potential benefit for nearly all criteria, supporting CDC recommendations that trauma triage criteria be considered in their entirety, not as individual criterion.

Undertriage in trauma: Does an organized trauma network capture the major trauma victim? A statewide analysis

BACKGROUND

Proper triage of critically injured trauma patients to accredited trauma centers (TCs) is essential for survival and patient outcomes. We sought to determine the percentage of patients meeting trauma criteria who received care at non-TCs (NTCs) within the statewide trauma system that exists in the state of Pennsylvania. We hypothesized that a substantial proportion of the trauma population would be undertriaged to NTCs with undertriage rates (UTR) decreasing with increasing severity of injury.

METHODS

All adult (age ≥15) hospital admissions meeting trauma criteria (ICD-9, 800-959; Injury Severity Score [ISS], > 9 or > 15) from 2003 to 2015 were extracted from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council (PHC4) database, and compared with the corresponding trauma population within the Pennsylvania Trauma Systems Foundation (PTSF) registry. PHC4 contains all hospital admissions within PA while PTSF collects data on all trauma cases managed at designated TCs (Level I-IV). The percentage of patients meeting trauma criteria who are undertriaged to NTCs was determined and Network Analyst Location-Allocation function in ArcGIS Desktop was used to generate geospatial representations of undertriage based on ISSs throughout the state.

RESULTS

For ISS > 9, 173,022 cases were identified from 2003 to 2015 in PTSF, while 255,263 cases meeting trauma criteria were found in the PHC4 database over the same timeframe suggesting UTR of 32.2%. For ISS > 15, UTR was determined to be 33.6%. Visual geospatial analysis suggests regions with limited access to TCs comprise the highest proportion of undertriaged trauma patients.

CONCLUSION

Despite the existence of a statewide trauma framework for over 30 years, approximately, a third of severely injured trauma patients are managed at hospitals outside of the trauma system in PA. Intelligent trauma system design should include an objective process like geospatial mapping rather than the current system which is driven by competitive models of financial and health care system imperatives.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Epidemiological study, level III; Therapeutic, level IV.

Streamlining pre- and intra-hospital care for patients with severe trauma: a white paper from the European Critical Care Foundation

PURPOSE

Major trauma remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the developed and developing world. In 2013, nearly 5 million people worldwide died from their injuries, and almost 1 billion individuals sustained injuries that warranted some type of healthcare, accounting for around 10% of the global burden of disease in general. Behind the statistics, severe trauma takes a major toll on individuals, their families and healthcare systems. Management of the patient with severe trauma requires multiple interventions in a highly time-sensitive context and fragmentation of care, characterised by loss of information and time among disciplines, departments and individuals, both outside the hospital and within it, is frequent. Outcomes may be improved by better streamlining of pre- and intra-hospital care.

METHODS

We describe the basis for development of a multi-stakeholder consortium by the European Critical Care Foundation working closely with a number of European Scientific Societies to address and overcome problems of fragmentation in the care of patients with severe trauma.

RESULT

The consortium will develop and introduce an information management system adapted to severe trauma, which will integrate continuous monitoring of vital parameters and point-of-care diagnostics. The key innovation of the project is to harness the power of information technologies and artificial intelligence to provide computer-enhanced clinical evaluation and decision-support to streamline the multiple points at which information and time are potentially lost.

CONCLUSIONS

The severe trauma management platform thus created could have multiple benefits beyond its immediate use in managing the care of injured patients.