Prospective evaluation of early missed injuries and the role of tertiary trauma survey

Missed injuries during the initial assessment in a cohort of 1124 level-1 trauma patients

INTRODUCTION

Despite the presence of diagnostic guidelines for the initial evaluation in trauma, the reported incidence of missed injuries is considerable. The aim of this study was to assess the missed injuries in a large cohort of trauma patients originating from two European Level-1 trauma centres.

METHODS

We analysed the 1124 patients included in the randomised REACT trial. Missed injuries were defined as injuries not diagnosed or suspected during initial clinical and radiological evaluation in the trauma room. We assessed the frequency, type, consequences and the phase in which the missed injuries were diagnosed and used univariate analysis to identify potential contributing factors.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and three patients were male, median age was 38 years and 1079 patients sustained blunt trauma. Overall, 122 injuries were missed in 92 patients (8.2%). Most injuries concerned the extremities. Sixteen injuries had an AIS grade of ≥ 3. Patients with missed injuries had significantly higher injury severity scores (ISSs) (median of 15 versus 5, p<0.001). Factors associated with missed injuries were severe traumatic brain injury (GCS ≤ 8) and multitrauma (ISS ≥ 16). Seventy-two missed injuries remained undetected during tertiary survey (59%). In total, 31 operations were required for 26 initially missed injuries.

CONCLUSION

Despite guidelines to avoid missed injuries, this problem is hard to prevent, especially in the severely injured. The present study showed that the rate of missed injuries was comparable with the literature and their consequences not severe. A high index of suspicion remains warranted, especially in multitrauma patients.

Traumatic Brain Injuries after Mass-Casualty Incidents: Lessons from the 11 September 2001 World Trade Center Attacks

Introduction:

The 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC) resulted in thousands of deaths and injuries. Research on previous bombings and explosions has shown that head injuries, including traumatic brain injuries (TBIs), are among the most common injuries.

Objective:

The objective of this study was to identify diagnosed and undiagnosed (undetected) TBIs among persons hospitalized in New York City following the 11 September 2001 WTC attacks.

Methods:

The medical records of persons admitted to 36 hospitals in New York City with injuries or illnesses related to the WTC attacks were abstracted for signs and symptoms of TBIs. Diagnosed TBIs were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes. Undiagnosed TBIs were identified by an adjudication team of TBI experts that reviewed the abstracted medical record information. Persons with an undiagnosed TBI were contacted and informed of the diagnosis of potential undetected injury.

Results:

A total of 282 records were abstracted. Fourteen cases of diagnosed TBIs and 21 cases of undiagnosed TBIs were identified for a total of 35 TBI cases (12% of all of the abstracted records). The leading cause of TBI was being hit by falling debris (22 cases). One-third of the TBIs (13 cases) occurred among rescue workers.More than three years after the event, four out of six persons (66.67%) with an undiagnosed TBI who were contacted reported they currently were experiencing symptoms consistent with a TBI.

Conclusions:

Not all of the TBIs among hospitalized survivors of the WTC attacks were diagnosed at the time of acute injury care. Some persons with undiagnosed TBIs reported problems that may have resulted from these TBIs three years after the event. For hospitalized survivors of mass-casualty incidents, additional in-hospital, clinical surveys could help improve pre-discharge TBI diagnosis and provide the opportunity to link patients to appropriate outpatient services. The use and adequacy of head protection for rescue workers deserves re-evaluation.

Delays in diagnosis in early trauma care: evaluation of diagnostic efficiency and circumstances of delay

BACKGROUND

Trauma centers, trauma management concepts, damage control surgery and the integration of whole-body CT scanning into early trauma care have reduced mortality in traumatized patients significantly. However, some injuries are still initially missed. In this study, the diagnostic efficiency of early trauma care and the circumstances of delays in diagnosis were evaluated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Initially missed diagnoses in 111 traumatized patients were recorded retrospectively. "Primary diagnoses" after the emergency room (ER) phase including CT scanning with immediate data evaluation were compared to "secondary diagnoses" after a secondary survey of the CT data, as well as to discharge diagnoses. Circumstances of delay were assessed according to injury severity score (ISS), hospital admission, mechanism of injury, diagnostics, treatment, time in the intensive care unit, hospitalization and mortality.

RESULTS

73% of the patients arrived at the ER during on-call hours. In 23% of all patients, diagnoses were missed after the ER phase, while in 12% of the patients diagnoses were missed after the secondary survey of the CT data. One half of the missed diagnoses were almost impossible to detect; the other half were judged to be acceptable. During on-call hours, 9% more patients with delays in diagnosis were observed. Injury severity in patients with delays in diagnosis was significantly higher than in patients without.

CONCLUSIONS

Although diagnostic quality in early trauma care has improved, some diagnoses are initially missed. Severely injured patients with life-threatening or potentially life-threatening injuries arriving at the ER during on-call hours were at higher risk for delays in diagnosis. A secondary evaluation of acquired CT data and repetitive examinations are essential.

Incidence and predictors of missed injuries in trauma patients in the initial hot report of whole-body CT scan

BACKGROUND

Whole-body CT scan is the cornerstone of trauma-related injury assessment. Several lines of evidence indicate that significant number of injuries may remain undetected after the initial hot report of CT. Missed injuries (MI) represent an important issue in trauma patients, for they may increase morbidity, mortality and costs. The aim of this study was to examine incidence and predictors of MI in trauma patients undergoing whole-body CT scan.

METHODS

177 CT scan performed upon admission of trauma patients during year 2005 were reviewed by a radiologist blinded to patient's initial data. MI was defined as injuries not written in the initial report. Patients with and without MI were compared to determine predictors of MI by multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

157 MI were diagnosed in 85 (47%) patients. MI was predominantly encoded AIS 2 (57%) or 3 (29%). Patients with MI had significantly higher SAPSII, higher ISS and were more frequently sedated. Age over 50 years (OR: 4.37, p=0.003) and ISS over 14 (OR: 4.17, p<0.0001) were independent predictors of MI. Median ISS after encoding MI was significantly higher than initial ISS (22 vs. 20 p<0.0001). After adjustment for severity, mortality and length of stay were not different between patients with or without MI.

CONCLUSION

Trauma patients, especially aged and severe, experienced a high rate of missed injuries in the initial hot report which appeared to be predominantly minor and musculoskeletal, advocating a CT scan second reading.

Quality control in neuroradiology: discrepancies in image interpretation among academic neuroradiologists

Prior studies have found a 3%-6% clinically significant error rate in radiology practice. We set out to assess discrepancy rates between subspecialty-trained university-based neuroradiologists. Over 17 months, university neuroradiologists randomly reviewed 1000 studies and reports of previously read examinations of patients in whom follow-up studies were read. The discrepancies between the original and "second opinion" reports were scored according to a 5-point scale: 1, no change; 2, clinically insignificant detection discrepancy; 3, clinically insignificant interpretation discrepancy; 4, clinically significant detection discrepancy; and 5, clinically significant interpretation discrepancy. Of the 1000 studies, 876 (87.6%) showed agreements with the original report. The neuroradiology division had a 2.0% (20/1000; 95% CI, 1.1%-2.9%) rate of clinically significant discrepancies involving 8 CTs and 12 MR images. Discrepancies were classified as vascular (n = 7), neoplastic (n = 9), congenital (n = 2), and artifacts (n = 2). Individual neuroradiologist's scores ranged from 0% to 7.7% ± 2.3% (n = 18). Both CT and MR imaging studies had a discrepancy rate of 2.0%. Our quality assessment study could serve as initial data before intervention as part of a PQI project.

Incidence rate and risk factors of missed injuries in major trauma patients

This study was designed to determine the incidence rate and risk factors of missed injuries in major trauma patients in the emergency department (ED). Hospital records of all 976 trauma patients visiting the ED and admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) of a medical center in Taiwan from 2006 to 2007 were reviewed. Missed injuries were defined as those not identified in the ED but recognized later in the ICUs. Clinically significant injuries were those with an Abbreviated Injury Scale of ≥ 2. In the 2-year period, there were 133 missed injuries in 118 patients in the ED, for a prevalence of 12.1%; 87 injuries were clinically significant in 78 patients, for a prevalence of 8.0%. The estimated incidence rate per 100 person-hours was 3.2 for missed injuries and 2.1 for clinically significant missed injuries. The most commonly involved body region of missed injuries was the head/neck, followed by the chest and extremities. Results of a Cox regression analysis showed that a younger age, more-severe injury, polytrauma, and the absence of soft-tissue injuries were significantly associated with missed injuries, while younger ages, more-severe injuries, and the presence of chest and pelvic injuries were also significantly associated with clinically significant missed injuries. In conclusion, a considerable number of injuries, particularly to the head/neck, may be undetected in the ED, while young people and patients with certain injury patterns such as severity levels, polytrauma, and the presence of a chest or pelvic injury are more likely to have missed injuries and/or clinically significant missed injuries.

Predictors of missed injuries in hospitalized trauma patients in the emergency department

AIM

To determine the extent of missed injuries in patients hospitalized with major trauma in a Turkish Level 1 emergency department. We also tried to identify the primary factors contributing to each missed injury and to determine their subsequent adverse short-term clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on a cohort of trauma patients. Trauma patients were divided into two groups: patients with missed injury and others. Logistic regression was used to define factors affecting "missed injury".

RESULTS

A total of 670 hospitalized trauma patients were included. The incidence of missed injuries in the patients and the rate of missed injury per patient were 13.3% (95% CI 6-20) and 1.64, respectively. The most frequently missed diagnosis was injuries of the musculoskeletal system (38%; 95% CI 30-46). It was "clavicle fracture and/or dislocation" (35%; 95% CI 16-53) when the rate of missed diagnosis according to the frequency of the specific injury was calculated. A multiple logistic regression analysis showed that the predictors of missed injuries were patient's age (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.87), total number of injuries (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.38-2.20), and ISS (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.18). Radiological errors were prominent in almost 90% (95% CI 85-95). Missed injury caused additional hospital stay (30%; 95% CI 21-40) and additional surgery was required (15%; 95% CI 8-23).

CONCLUSION

The study highlights the need for a trauma team approach and the need for support of radiological report in the ED.

Validation of nurse-performed FAST ultrasound

BACKGROUND

Patients presenting to Emergency Departments (EDs) with abdominal trauma benefit from FAST (Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma). Not all doctor members of the trauma team are credentialed in FAST; therefore occasionally no one is available in the hospital to undertake a FAST. Hence, the aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of nurse-performed FAST as a practical alternative where suitably trained doctors are not available.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of a convenience sample of patients with multisystem trauma in whom abdominal injury was clinically suspected. Senior nurses trained in FAST performed and reported FAST scans for each patient. Accuracy of nurse-performed FAST was determined by comparing results with computerised tomography (CT) scan or operation report.

RESULTS

242 indicated nurse-performed FAST scans were included in the study. Nurse-performed FAST demonstrated sensitivity of 84.4% (95% CI 72.1-92.2) and specificity of 98.4% (CI 94.9-99.6), a positive predictive value (PPV) of 94.2% (CI 83.1-98.5) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.3% (91.0-97.7). Overall accuracy of nurse-performed FAST for the detection of free fluid was 95.0% (95% CI 91.3-97.3).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that, in a convenience sample of injured patients, nurse-performed FAST achieved similar accuracy to previously published results of doctor-performed FAST. Future studies with greater patient numbers would be valuable.

Prediction of blunt traumatic injury in high-acuity patients: bedside examination vs computed tomography

OBJECTIVE

The addition of spiral computed tomography (SCT) to bedside assessment in patients with major trauma may improve detection of significant injury. We hypothesized that in high-acuity trauma patients, emergency physicians' ability to detect significant injuries based solely on bedside assessment would lack the sensitivity needed to exclude serious injuries when compared with SCT.

METHODS

This was a prospective single-cohort study of high-acuity trauma patients routinely undergoing whole-body SCT at a level 1 trauma center from January to September 2006. Before SCT, emergency physicians assigned ratings for likelihood of injury to 5 body regions on the basis of bedside assessment. These ratings were compared with final SCT interpretations.

RESULTS

We enrolled 400 patients as a convenience sample; 71 were excluded. When a "very low" rating was considered negative and "low," "intermediate," "high," and "very high" were considered positive, emergency physicians were able to detect head, cervical spine, chest, abdominal/pelvic, and thoracic/lumbar spine injuries with sensitivities (95% confidence interval) of 100% (98.6%-100%), 97.4% (94.9%-98.8%), 96.9% (94.2%-98.4%), 97.9% (95.5%-99.1%), and 97.0% (94.3%-98.5%), respectively. For overall diagnostic accuracy, areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve (95% confidence interval) were 0.87 (0.82-0.92), 0.71 (0.62-0.81), 0.81 (0.76-0.86), 0.77(0.71-0.83), 0.74 (0.65-0.84), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Bedside assessment by emergency physicians before SCT was sensitive in ruling out serious injuries in high-acuity trauma patients with a "very low" rating for injury. However, overall diagnostic accuracy was low, suggesting that SCT should be considered in most high-acuity patients to prevent missing injuries.

Pitfalls in the evaluation and resuscitation of the trauma patient

The management of the trauma patient presents the practitioner with a host of challenges, and the pace, variety of venues, and multidisciplinary nature of the field combine to create a system complexity that is laden with potential pitfalls. This review summarizes some of the general principles of medical errors and examines some of the more common pitfalls encountered in the initial resuscitation and evaluation of the major trauma patient.

Primary pan-computed tomography for blunt multiple trauma: can the whole be better than its parts?

Single-pass, whole-body computed tomography (pan-CT) was proposed in the late 1990s as a new concept for the diagnostic work-up of severely injured patients. Since its introduction, it has led to considerable debate among clinicians and scientists, triggered by concerns about its immediate safety, questionable therapeutic advantages and exposure to radiation. However, it was recently shown that pan-CT scanning may be associated with a reduction in trauma mortality. In this article, we provide an overview of current knowledge of the value of this compelling concept. The diagnostic accuracy of multidetector row CT (MDCT) for clearing various anatomical regions in trauma patients is, at best, unclear. Little is known about the accuracy of pan-CT as a whole, which weakens statements about its effectiveness and prevents inferences about survival advantages. This last point may be explained by a stage-migration or "Will Rogers" phenomenon: Pan-CT increases injury severity by detecting lesions that would not have been recognized by conventional methods but still do not affect treatment decisions, thus artificially lowering the ratio of observed to expected deaths. In order to maintain the credibility of pan-CT technology for trauma, a rigorous, large-scale evaluation of its accuracy is required. Such an evaluation requires consensus about the definition of true and false positive and negative findings in the setting of blunt multiple trauma. In addition, triage criteria need to be refined to increase specificity and reduce the number of unnecessary scans.

Resuscitative Long-Bone Sonography for the Clinician: Usefulness and Pitfalls of Focused Clinical Ultrasound to Detect Long-Bone Fractures During Trauma Resuscitation

Bone has one of the highest acoustic densities (AD) in the human body. Traditionally, bone has been considered to be a hindrance to the use of ultrasound (US), as US waves are reflected by the dense matrix and obscure underlying structures. The intense wave reflection, however, can clearly illustrate the cortical bony anatomy of long bones, making cortical disruption obvious. Ultrasound can be used at the bedside concurrently with the overall trauma resuscitation, and may potentially limit the patient's and treating team's exposure to ionizing radiation, corroborate clinical findings, and augment procedural success. The extended focused assessment with sonography for trauma (EFAST) is an essential tool in the resuscitation of severe torso trauma, frequently demonstrating intra- pericardial and intra-peritoneal fluid, inferring hemo/pneumothoraces, and demonstrating cardiac function. Although it is typically considered as a diagnosis of exclusion, multiple long-bone fractures may be a source of shock and can be quickly confirmed at the bedside with EFAST. Further, the early detection of long-bone fractures can also aid in the early stabilization of severely injured patients. Sonographic evaluation for long-bone fractures may be particularly useful in austere environments where other imaging modalities are limited, such as in the battlefield, developing world, and space. While prospective study has been limited, selected series have demonstrated high accuracy among both physician and para-medical clinicians in detecting long-bone fractures. Pitfalls in this technique include reduced accuracy with the small bones of the hands and feet, as well as great reliance on user experience.

What are we missing: results of a 13-month active follow-up program at a level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

Poor follow-up by patients with trauma results in a lack of knowledge of postdischarge health-related issues. This study reports on postdischarge health-related issues discovered by a program of active postdischarge contact or follow-up.

METHODS

All patients discharged home from the trauma service were followed up in the following manner: within 4 weeks of discharge, telephonic follow-up was attempted three times followed by scanning of electronic records. Failing that, other physicians (specialists or primary care) were contacted. Once contact was established, the patient, family member, or physician was questioned about the general well-being, any specific health-related issue, and the resolution.

RESULTS

During the 13-month study period ending September 2007, a total of 1,353 patients met entry criteria. Contact was established with 692 (51%). Of these, 116 (17%) were found to have significant health issues: (1) severe uncontrolled pain, 45; (2) missed injury, 17 (spine fractures, 4; clavicle or hand or foot fractures, 6; facial bone fractures, 3; soft tissue, 3; hematuria, 1); (3) wound infections, 17; (4) other infections, 17 (urinary, 8; pulmonary, 7; blood stream, 2) (5) venous thromboembolism, 10; and (6) other, 9 (psychiatric, 6; nontraumatic, 3). One patient died at home within 24 hours of discharge. The issues were significant enough for the patients to seek medical care (outpatient, 39; emergency department visits, 52; hospitalization, 24).

CONCLUSION

A significant proportion of patients with trauma have moderate to severe health-related issues postdischarge that are often not found by the trauma team or the trauma registry. Active follow-up can identify the nature of the medical issues and help in designing system changes to reduce or eliminate them.

Perceived value of trauma autopsy among trauma medical directors and coroners

INTRODUCTION

Although autopsy is acknowledged as essential for improving quality of medical care of trauma patients and accuracy of injury surveillance systems, the autopsy rate has remained well below 100% for certain categories of trauma. We obtained recent documentation of the frequency of autopsy among trauma-related deaths in Ohio, and surveyed coroners and trauma program medical directors (TMDs) about the perceived benefits and challenges of performing autopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Copies of death certificates were obtained for the years 1996-2001. Death and autopsy rates were calculated and examined for trends over time. Surveys covering the topics of mechanisms of injury prompting autopsy, uses and users of autopsy data, and barriers to performing autopsy were sent to Ohio's coroners, coroners from nearby states, and Ohio TMDs. The chi(2)-test for trend analysed autopsy rates over time, while responses among groups were compared using the chi(2)-test.

RESULTS

The autopsy rate for injury related deaths increased from 50% in 1996 to 66.5% in 2001 (p=.0018). During the study period the volume of autopsies rose by 18%, from 2990 to 3546. There was no review by the coroner in almost 10% of trauma deaths. TMDs more often indicated that autopsies advance medical knowledge than did Ohio and non-Ohio coroners (62.9% versus 33.4% and 47.6%, respectively, p=.016). TMDs more frequently reported themselves as users of autopsy information than did Ohio and non-Ohio coroners (91.4% versus 14.6% and 20%, respectively, p<.0001). All groups reported inadequate funds and personnel as the two most common barriers to performing autopsies, although TMDs were more likely to identify these as barriers than coroners (p<.0001). Almost 27% of Ohio coroners agreed with the statement, "I do not feel that trauma-related autopsies are necessary".

CONCLUSION

Significant barriers exist to improving autopsy rates among trauma patients who die. These include not only more well-recognised impediments such as inadequate funds and personnel, but less commonly reported issues concerning differing points of view on the role of trauma-related autopsy among coroners and TMDs. To improve trauma-related autopsy rates, each of these issues requires attention and cooperation among all parties.

Missed injuries in trauma patients: A literature review

BACKGROUND

Overlooked injuries and delayed diagnoses are still common problems in the treatment of polytrauma patients. Therefore, ongoing documentation describing the incidence rates of missed injuries, clinically significant missed injuries, contributing factors and outcome is necessary to improve the quality of trauma care. This review summarizes the available literature on missed injuries, focusing on overlooked muscoloskeletal injuries.

METHODS

Manuscripts dealing with missed injuries after trauma were reviewed. The following search modules were selected in PubMed: Missed injuries, Delayed diagnoses, Trauma, Musculoskeletal injuires. Three time periods were differentiated: (n = 2, 1980-1990), (n = 6, 1990-2000), and (n = 9, 2000-Present).

RESULTS

We found a wide spread distribution of missed injuries and delayed diagnoses incidence rates (1.3% to 39%). Approximately 15 to 22.3% of patients with missed injuries had clinically significant missed injuries. Furthermore, we observed a decrease of missed pelvic and hip injuries within the last decade.

CONCLUSION

The lack of standardized studies using comparable definitions for missed injuries and clinically significant missed injuries call for further investigations, which are necessary to produce more reliable data. Furthermore, improvements in diagnostic techniques (e.g. the use of multi-slice CT) may lead to a decreased incidence of missed pelvic injuries. Finally, the standardized tertiary trauma survey is vitally important in the detection of clinically significant missed injuries and should be included in trauma care.

Improving identification of traumatic brain injury after nonmilitary bomb blasts

OBJECTIVE

To improve identification of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in survivors of nonmilitary bomb blasts during the acute care phase.

METHODS

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a meeting of experts in TBI, emergency medicine, and disaster response to review the recent literature and make recommendations.

RESULTS

Seven key recommendations were proposed: (1) increase TBI awareness among medical professionals; (2) encourage use of standard definitions and consistent terminology; (3) improve screening methods for TBI in the acute care setting; (4) clarify the distinction between TBI and acute stress disorder; (5) encourage routine screening of hospitalized trauma patients for TBI; (6) improve identification of nonhospitalized TBI patients; and (7) integrate the appropriate level of TBI identification into all-hazards mass casualty preparedness.

CONCLUSIONS

By adopting these recommendations, the United States could be better prepared to identify and respond to TBI following future bombing events.

Missed injury and the tertiary trauma survey

Missed injury in the context of major trauma remains a persistent problem, both from a clinical and medico-legal point-of-view. Estimates of the incidence vary widely, dependent on the precise parameters of the studied population, the definition of missed injury and the extent of follow-up, but may be as high as 38%. The tertiary survey, in which formal repeated examination of the patient is undertaken after initial resuscitation and treatment have taken place, has been suggested as a way of identifying injuries not found at presentation. This paper appraises the concept of the tertiary survey, and also reviews the literature on missed injury in order to identify the risk factors, the types of injury and the reasons for error.

[The significance of delayed diagnosis of lesions in multiply traumatised patients. A study of 1,187 shock room patients]

BACKGROUND

Multislice computed tomography (CT) technology has improved the diagnosis of relevant lesions within the phase of primary treatment of severely injured patients. The lack of time in this phase and the complexity of the multiple injuries there is still a risk that lesions will be missed at this stage. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence, causes, implications and significance when injuries are not diagnosed until later.

METHODS

The data were documented prospectively in the context of a quality management system for the care of severely injured patients in a primary urban trauma centre. Missed injuries were defined as any lesions that had not been recognised by the time the patient was admitted to the ICU.

RESULTS

During a 44-month period 1,187 (ISS 21+/-17) patients were enrolled in the study, all of whom were admitted from May 1998 to April 2002 after attending the emergency room. In total 64 (4.9%) missed injuries were detected in 58 (ISS 30+/-16) patients; 26 of the 64 missed injuries were located on the torso, 8 injuries in the head and neck region, and 30 on the arms and legs. The missed injuries were categorised as follows: 1. Lesion not seen in diagnostics (n=15). 2. Incomplete diagnostics (n=8). 3. Primarily unsuspicuous examination (n=35). 4. Diagnostics interrupted due to hemodynamic instability (n=6).

CONCLUSION

Despite intensified and standardised diagnostic procedures prescribed for use in trauma centres, injuries are still missed in severely injured patients. About 30% of lesions that are not diagnosed until after the patient has left the emergency room have clinically significant, but not lethal, consequences for the patient. Great importance attaches to the follow-up investigation on the intensive care station, so that lesions that have initially been overlooked can be diagnosed and treated as soon as possible so as to keep the complication rate low.

Forensic considerations of missed diagnoses in trauma deaths

Injuries missed at initial diagnoses or operations have the potential to cause disastrous complications in trauma patients. Understanding the etiology of unrecognized injuries is essential in minimizing its occurrence. For this purpose, we scrutinized the treatment and the autopsy records of the trauma deaths from 2000 to 2004 to determine the frequency, body regions, severity and causes of injuries that escaped recognition during the initial assessment, primary, secondary and tertiary surveys by the clinical team in patients who died of trauma. We also examined the accuracy of the cause of death as recorded on death certificates. The frequency of unrecognized injuries was found to be 11% in all trauma deaths. Abdomen (40%) and head (29%) were the more common regions of the body where injuries were frequently missed. System related errors (68%) and patient related factors (32%) were responsible for the injury remaining unrecognized. It was concluded that the injuries may be missed at any stage of the management of patients with major trauma and repeated assessments both clinical and radiological are mandatory not only to diminish the problem but to avoid litigation as well.

[Initial pediatric trauma care and cardiopulmonary resuscitation]

Accidents are a frequent cause of death in children older than 1 year. The most frequent causes of death by accident are traffic accidents, drowning, intentional injuries, burns, and falls. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is one component of the set of actions needed to obtain initial stabilization of a child with serious trauma. In the first few minutes after the accident, cardiorespiratory arrest can occur due to airway obstruction or inadequate ventilation, massive blood loss or severe brain damage; cardiorespiratory arrest in this setting has a dismal outcome. When arrest occurs hours after trauma, it is usually caused by hypoxia, hypovolemia, hypothermia, intracranial hypertension, or electrolyte disturbances. The first response to trauma should include three objectives: to protect (scenario assessment and implementation of safety measures), to alert (activation of the emergency medical system) and to help (initial trauma care). Initial trauma care includes primary and secondary surveys. The primary survey involves several consecutive steps: A. airway and cervical spine stabilization, B. breathing, C. circulation and hemorrhage control, D. neurological dysfunction, and E. exposure. The secondary survey consists of assessment of the victim by means of anamnesis, sequential physical examination (from head to limbs) and complementary investigations. During emergency trauma care, specific procedures such as extrication and mobilization maneuvers, cervical spine control by means of bimanual immobilization, and cervical collar placement or helmet removal. If a cardiorespiratory arrest occurs during initial trauma care, resuscitation maneuvers must be immediately started with the specific adaptations indicated in children with trauma.

Proactive versus reactive: the effect of experience on performance in a critical care simulator

BACKGROUND

We sought to study the cognitive performance of residents in a critical care patient simulator.

METHODS

Residents in general surgery and emergency medicine were recruited to participate in the study. Subjects were read a morning report and presented with written data for 4 critical care patients. The subjects were evaluated on completing essential clinical tasks, cognitive errors, and directionality of reasoning.

RESULTS

Nine residents completed the study. Months of clinical residency training did not significantly affect performance. Residents with more than 10 weeks of intensive care unit (ICU) experience (EXP) made significantly fewer cognitive errors than those with less than 10 weeks of ICU experience (N-I) (EXP: .75 +/- .96 vs N-I: 7 +/- 5.6 errors per subject, P < .05). An unexpected finding was that EXP performed far more proactive actions than N-I (EXP: 21.8 +/- 9.9/subject vs N-I: 5.7 +/- .6/subjects, P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

A unique finding was that residents with more than 10 weeks of ICU experience initiated a large number of proactive actions immediately following presentation of patient information, while N-I rarely performed these actions. In addition, residents with this degree of experience committed significantly fewer cognitive errors. These differences might play a role in efficiency, cost, and overall outcome in the care of ICU patients.

Missed injuries: a Ugandan experience

BACKGROUND

Missed injuries (MIs) have been noted worldwide in all trauma centres that have studied them, and they are a significant cause of patient morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To establish the prevalence, contributing factors and short-term outcome of missed injuries in cases of multiple and major trauma.

METHOD

Longitudinal prospective study involving 403 patients over 5 months.

RESULTS

Missed injuries were discovered in 78 cases (prevalence 19.4%). Contributing factors included incomplete assessment (52.5%), radiological errors, surgical failures and patient's arrival time. The most affected body regions were the head and neck, extremities and pelvic girdle and contents; in the abdomen, 49.1% of injuries were missed. Among the 28 deaths in the study, 21 occurred in cases with missed injuries, and 13 (62%) of these deaths were directly attributable to missed injuries (R2=12.5, p=0.0001, 95% CI 5.5-28.35).

CONCLUSION

There is need for improvement in patient assessment and monitoring, in efficiency of the trauma team, and for staff redistribution to address the increase in night arrivals.

Reducing Missed Injuries at a Level II Trauma Center

The phenomenon of missed injury in trauma patients has been recognized for some time. Tertiary examination has been proposed as one strategy to decrease the incidence of missed injuries. The tertiary examination is a comprehensive reevaluation that includes a repeated head-to-toe examination and review of all laboratory and radiologic studies, completed within 24 hours of admission. The purpose of this study was to assess the statistical significance of missed injuries discovered through tertiary examinations at a level II trauma center. Over a period of 6 months, a tertiary examination was completed before discharge of admitted patients who met activation criteria. Of the 90 patients, 13 had a missed injury (incidence of 14%), which was significant. The 16 missed injuries represented only 2.7% of the total 589 injuries, which was not significant. The most commonly missed injuries were fractures of the extremities. We propose that tertiary examinations be adopted as a standard of care for patients admitted to level II trauma centers.

Clinical forensic medicine in the present day trauma-care system--an overview

Criminal violence and its associated trauma comprise a critical health problem throughout the world. Clinical forensic medicine represents a new discipline of medical practice that is evolving in direct response to the sequelae of criminal and interpersonal violence. The application of the principles and standards of the forensic specialist has been increasingly recognized as playing a crucial role in trauma care; the results of the extremes of human behaviour-abused children, individuals suffering from blatant neglect and maltreatment, or self-inflicted injury, and victims of road-traffic accidents, firearm injuries and other assaults. These cases must be reported to a legal agency for investigation and follow-up. As trends in crime and violence change, new antiviolence legislation is likely to be implemented; consequently, new personnel resources are required to ensure that these legislative mandates effectively meet the needs of society.

A missed injury in multiple trauma patient-is it avoidable?

We report a case of a 24-year-old male with fractures at multiple levels of both femur and tibia. The patient was operated upon and a satisfactory clinical outcome was achieved. In spite of a thorough secondary survey, a displaced ankle fracture had been missed. The case is reported for the unusual combination of fractures and to highlight the importance of undetected injuries. We recommend that a tertiary survey should be carried out routinely in all polytrauma patients to prevent missed injuries.

Clinical and Autopsy Analysis of Delayed Diagnosis and Missed Injuries in Trauma Patients

Delayed diagnosis of injury (DDI) during hospitalization and missed injuries (MI) on autopsy in trauma deaths result in untoward outcomes. Autopsy is an effective educational tool for health care providers to evaluate trauma care. A retrospective study of trauma registry patients and coroner's records was categorized into groups 1 (alive patients) and 2 (trauma deaths) and analyzed. DDI incidence was similar in group 1 (1.8%) and group 2 (1.9%). Autopsy analysis (163 patients) yielded 139 MI in 94 patients (57.6%), <3 per cent of MI had negative impact on survival. Bony injuries comprised 68 per cent of DDI and 19 per cent of MI. Group 1 DDI patients were sicker with higher injury severity score (ISS: 16.07) than their cohorts (ISS 7.13, P value <0.05). These patients had higher Glasgow Coma Scale (14.41) and lower ISS (16.07) as compared with group 2 MI patients (ISS: 33.49, GCS: 6.45, P value <0.05). Autopsy rate was 99.5 per cent in trauma deaths, 57 per cent for nontrauma deaths, and 79 per cent for all deaths. Less than 3 per cent of MI had negative impact on survival. Routine ongoing patient assessment with pertinent diagnostic workup is essential in reducing DDI. Trauma autopsies reveal MI, which aid performance improvement (PI).

Accuracy of mild traumatic brain injury case ascertainment using ICD-9 codes

OBJECTIVES

To determine the accuracy of mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) case ascertainment using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes proposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in a 2003 Report to Congress.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study of all patients presenting to an urban academic emergency department (ED) over six months in 2003. A real-time clinical assessment of mild TBI was compared with the ICD-9 codes assigned after ED or hospital discharge for a determination of sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

Of the 35,096 patients presenting to the ED, 516 had clinically defined mild TBI and 1,000 were assigned one or more of the mild TBI ICD-9 codes proposed by the CDC. The sensitivity of these codes was 45.9% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 41.3% to 50.2%) with a specificity of 97.8% (95% CI = 97.6% to 97.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

The identification of mild TBI patients using retrospectively assigned ICD-9 codes appears to be inaccurate. These codes are associated with a significant number of false-positive and false-negative code assignments. Mild TBI incidence and prevalence estimates using these codes should be interpreted with caution. ICD-9 codes should not replace a clinical assessment for mild TBI when accurate case ascertainment is required.

Lesiones inadvertidas en el politraumatizado: análisis de un registro de trauma

INTRODUCTION

The frequency of missed injuries (MI) in patients with trauma oscillates between 0.5 and 38%, depending on the distinct studies and their inclusion criteria. In the present study, we evaluated the incidence, contributory factors and clinical relevance of these lesions, based on the Severe Trauma Registry of our center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed a registry of 912 cases of severe trauma, which were prospectively gathered. Of these, 19 patients had a MI (2%). Demographic (age and sex) and clinical variables (severity scales and mechanism of injury) were compared and avoidable contributory factors and clinically relevant MI were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 19 patients with a MI, 58% had closed injuries. No statistically significant differences were found in any of the variables studied, although penetrating injuries were clearly more frequent in patients with MI than in those without. Forty-seven percent of MI were musculoskeletal, 26% were visceral and 21% were vascular. Sixty-three percent of contributory factors were potentially avoidable and the most frequent reason for MI was incorrect clinical evaluation. Mortality due to lesions with a delayed diagnosis was 21%.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorrect clinical evaluation was the avoidable factor that would have the greatest impact on reducing the number of MI. Another factor that clearly contributes to reduction of MI is appropriate interpretation of radiological images in the context of a tertiary survey. All teams treating these patients should periodically evaluate their results and intervene in the factors contributing to missed diagnoses.

Paediatric trauma at an adult trauma centre

BACKGROUND

Trauma in children remains the commonest cause of mortality. The majority of injured children who reach hospital survive, indicating that additional more sensitive outcome measures should be utilized to evaluate paediatric trauma care, including morbidity and missed injury rates. Limited contemporary data have been presented reviewing the care of injured children at an adult trauma centre (ATC).

METHODS

A review was undertaken of injured children who warranted activation of the trauma team, treated within the emergency department of an ATC (Royal North Shore Hospital) situated in the Lower North Shore area of Sydney. Data were collected prospectively and patients followed through to death or discharge from the ATC or another institution to which they had been transferred.

RESULTS

A total of 93 children were admitted to the ATC between January 1999 and April 2002. Mean age was 9 years 3 months (range 5 weeks-15 years 9 months) and 70% were male. The median injury severity score was 15 (range 1-75) and there were three deaths. Forty-two children were transferred to a paediatric trauma centre (PTC), including three children who had been transferred to the ATC from another hospital. There was one missed injury and one iatrogenic urethral injury.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of children with trauma were treated safely and appropriately at the ATC. The missed injury rate was < 1% and there were no adverse long-term sequelae of initial treatment. Three secondary transfers could have been avoided by more appropriate coordination of the initial referral to a PTC.

Missed diagnoses in trauma patients vis-à-vis significance of autopsy

Post-mortem examination is considered to be the gold standard for the critique of medical practice, providing a quality control tool for the retrospective evaluation of diagnoses and treatment. Performing autopsies also facilitates new insight about the pathogenesis of disease and effects of therapy, gives feedback to clinical research protocols, provides epidemiological information and occasionally helps to console and reassure grieving families that death was inevitable. Its significance becomes paramount in cases of missed diagnosis in trauma-related deaths. The true incidence of missed diagnoses in trauma-related deaths is unknown, because autopsy is conducted in only about 50% of injury-related deaths. Few studies have documented the frequency of missed diagnoses leading to deaths specifically in the trauma ICU population. The present study is an attempt to evaluate the incidence and nature of missed injuries and complications in trauma-related deaths given an autopsy rate of close to 100%. This study also sought to identify the primary factors contributing to each missed injury. However, the study is in no way intended to assigning blame to human or system errors. Rather, it is focussed specifically on the issue of whether autopsy can be useful to provide feedback in identifying clinical problems of trauma patients.

Significant reduction in delayed diagnosis of injury with implementation of a pediatric trauma service

BACKGROUND

The occurrence of delayed diagnosis of injury (DDI) among pediatric trauma patients represents a breakdown in trauma care. Although some DDI may be unavoidable, the rate of DDI may be used as a measure of quality improvement.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to investigate DDI in admitted pediatric trauma patients while a designated pediatric trauma response team was used and compare this with the prior incidence of DDI (4.3%) before initiation of the response team.

METHODS

Primary Children's Medical Center (PCMC) is a regional tertiary pediatric trauma center. This analysis used the prospectively gathered PCMC Trauma Database, and included all hospitalized pediatric trauma patients from 1997 through 2000.

RESULTS

A total of 3265 patients were included; no patients were excluded. A DDI occurred in 15 (0.46%; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.79) trauma patients. The DDI patients were more severely injured with significantly higher Injury Severity Scores, lower TRISS Probability of Survival values, longer hospitalizations (P < or = 0.05, Mann-Whitney U), and were more frequently admitted to the PICU (P < or = 0.05, chi2) than the non-DDI patient population. In a previous study, our incidence of missed injury was 4.3% (50/1175; 95% CI: 3.3, 5.6); with implementation of a designated trauma response team and trauma service, the incidence of DDI was reduced nearly 10-fold to 0.46% (15/3265; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.79).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an effective trauma team and trauma service was associated with a significant reduction in DDI.

Improving performance in the management of severely injured patients in critical care

OBJECTIVE

To determine opportunities for improvement (OI) in the critical care management of severely injured patients in a general adult intensive care unit through a performance improvement (PI) process.

METHODS

Retrospective review of patient records from intensive care patients who had sustained traumatic injuries, except isolated head injury, over a 1-year period. Three assessors independently audited the notes using performance improvement methodology to determine complications, errors in management and preventability. Complications were included when two or more assessors independently detected the complication.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Records from 90 patients with a diagnosis of 'trauma' were reviewed, 14 patients with isolated head injury were excluded. The mean injury severity score was 23 (range 4-43). No complications or errors of management were identified from 41 patients, including ten patients who died. Seventy-two complications were identified in 35 patients including 15 pneumonias, 6 cases of peri-operative hypothermia and 5 recurrent pneumothoraces. Fourteen preventable complications were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The PI OI process highlighted specific opportunities for the improvement of critical care management of trauma patients in our unit. These will be addressed through the introduction of formal tertiary surveys and clinical management guidelines addressing hypothermia and management of coagulopathy.

Unsuspected internal organ traumatic injuries

Emergency medicine physicians can avoid missed traumatic intra-abdominal injury by adopting a paradigm for patient evaluation that recognizes the patterns of injury associated with pathology, the importance of positive and negative physical findings, and the limitations of diagnostic studies. The burden of avoiding missed traumatic injuries does not rest with emergency medicine physicians alone, however. A missed diagnosis may be the result of a medical error involving multiple systems and individuals.Ultimately, decreasing the incidence of missed traumatic injury is an opportunity for quality improvement for all practitioners involved in the care of patients with trauma.

Imaging of acute cervical spine injuries: review and outlook

Advances in imaging technology have been successfully applied in the emergency trauma setting with great benefit providing early, accurate and efficient diagnoses. Gaps in the knowledge of imaging acute spinal injury remain, despite a vast wealth of useful research and publications on the role of CT and MRI. This article reviews in a balanced manner the main questions that still face the attending radiologist by embracing the current and evolving concepts to help define and provide answers to the following; Imaging techniques -- strengths and weaknesses; what are the implications of a missed cervical spine injury?; who should be imaged?; how should they be imaged?; spinal immobilisation -- help or hazard?; residual open questions; what does all this mean?; and what are the implications for the radiologist? Although there are many helpful guidelines, the residual gaps in the knowledge base result in incomplete answers to the questions posed. The identification of these gaps in knowledge however should act as the initiating stimulus for further research. All too often there is a danger that the performance and productivity of the imaging modalities is the main research focus and not enough attention is given to the two fundamental prerequisites to the assessment of any imaging technology -- the clinical selection criteria for imaging and the level of expertise of the appropriate clinician interpreting the images.

Role of an extended tertiary survey in detecting missed injuries in children

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on the incidence of delayed diagnosis of injuries in children. We sought to investigate the role of an extended tertiary survey in pediatric trauma patients.

METHODS

All children that were admitted to The Children's Hospital at Westmead with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) >/= 9 were included in the study. The trauma fellow performed the tertiary survey the day after admission. This was repeated after extubation in ventilated patients and in head injury patients when they were more mobile and cooperative.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients satisfied the criteria for the study (50 boys and 26 girls). Age ranged from 1 month to 15 years. The median ISS was 14. Sixteen (16%) of the patients had missed injuries, of which skeletal injuries were the most common (10 of 12). Delayed diagnosis of injury occurred most frequently in children involved in motor vehicle injuries. Sixty-six (66%) of the injuries were detected within the first 24 hours. Inadequate assessment and head injury were the most common contributing factors.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of missed injury (16%) in our study was comparable to reported figures in the adult literature. There was no correlation between missed injuries and intensive care unit stay or ISS. Head injury often delayed diagnosis and thus ongoing evaluation in this group is recommended. Missed injuries did not result in mortality, but there was significant associated morbidity. A tertiary survey should be part of the evaluation of the pediatric trauma patient.

Missed injury in major trauma patients

OBJECTIVES

To determine the incidence, aetiology and contributing factors to injuries being missed during the primary and secondary surveys in patients with major trauma managed on a general Adult Intensive Care Unit (AICU).

METHODS

The records for patients admitted to the AICU following severe injury (defined as injury severity score (ISS) >16) over a 1-year period were reviewed. Diagnostic imaging performed during the resuscitation was reviewed in cases where missed injuries were discovered.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients with a median injury severity score of 26 were included in the study. Twelve missed injuries were discovered in 10 patients during the intensive care admission; three required an additional surgical procedure. There was no significant difference in Glasgow Coma Score, revised trauma score, ISS or admission systolic blood pressure between patients with missed injuries and those patients where all injures were found at resuscitation (P > 0.05). Three quarters of the undetected injuries were orthopaedic.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant injuries can be missed during the primary and secondary surveys in severely injured patients. A tertiary survey should be completed in all trauma patients admitted to an intensive care unit.