Trauma care regionalization: a process-outcome evaluation

Impact of trauma centre designation level on outcomes following hemorrhagic shock: a multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Hemorrhagic shock is responsible for 45% of injury fatalities in North America, and 50% of these occur within 2 h of injury. There is currently a lack of evidence regarding the trajectories of patients in hemorrhagic shock and the potential benefit of level I/II care for these patients. We aimed to compare mortality across trauma centre designation levels for patients in hemorrhagic shock. Secondary objectives were to compare surgical delays, complications and hospital length of stay (LOS).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study based on a Canadian inclusive trauma system (1999-2012), including adults with systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 90 mm Hg on arrival who required urgent surgical care (< 6 h). Logistic regression was used to examine the influence of trauma centre designation level on risk-adjusted surgical delays, mortality and complications. Linear regression was used to examine LOS.

RESULTS

Compared with level I centres, adjusted odds ratios (and 95% confidence intervals [CI]) of mortality for level III and IV centres were 1.71 (1.03-2.85) and 2.25 (1.08-4.73), respectively. Surgical delays did not vary across designation levels, but mean LOS and complications were lower in level II-IV centres than level I centres.

CONCLUSION

Level I/II centres may offer a survival advantage over level III/IV centres for patients requiring emergency intervention for hemorrhagic shock. Further research with larger sample sizes is required to confirm these results and to identify optimal transport time thresholds for bypassing level III/IV centres in favour of level I/II centres.

Effect of Hospital Volume on Success of Thumb Replantation

PURPOSE

Hospital volume-outcome association has been examined for many high-risk surgical procedures. Little is known about this association for thumb replantation, a complex but essential surgical procedure to restore hand function. We aimed to determine patient and hospital characteristics that are associated with increased probability of replanted thumb survival and to examine volume-outcome association among hospitals that performed thumb replantation.

METHODS

We used data from 2008 to 2012 from the National Trauma Data Bank. Our sample included 773 patients who underwent thumb replantation procedures in 1 of 180 hospitals during the study period. We used patient-level logistic models to examine the association between a hospital's annual thumb replantation volume and the probability of survival for the replanted thumb.

RESULTS

Patients with drug/alcohol abuse record, and higher numbers of comorbid conditions had lower odds of replant success. Treatment in teaching hospitals and hospitals with a higher volume of thumb replantation increased the odds of replant survival. The risk-adjusted replantation success rate in high-volume hospitals was 12% higher than in low-volume hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

Regionalization of digit replantation procedures to high-volume centers can achieve the highest rate of successful revascularization.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic/Decision Analysis II.

Epidemiology of trauma victims admitted to a level 2 trauma center of North India

Background:

Good quality information on characteristics of victims, types, and frequency of injuries, causes of accidents, vehicles involved in injury and outcome is essential for understanding and planning required for managing the trauma epidemic. The objective of this study was to describe the characteristics of trauma victims admitted to King George's Medical University trauma center.

Methods:

This observational study enrolled trauma victims over a 1-year period. Characteristics recorded were age, sex, systolic blood pressure at admission, respiratory rate at admission, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score at the time of admission, time since injury to admission, referral, specific injury, Injury Severity Score (ISS), chronic medical condition, mechanism of injury, and the regions involved. Outcome at the end of hospital stay was recorded.

Results:

A total of 3280 injuries were recorded in 2288 patients. Mean age 40.81 ± 16.3 years, predominantly male (83.57%), mean ISS 12.56 ± 7.3, mean GCS 12.20 ± 4.1. Mean time to admission (hospitalization) to trauma center was 54.22 ± 185.2 h. Head was the most commonly involved region (32.44%). Patients referred from peripheral hospitals had significantly lower GCS, higher time to admission to trauma center, and longer duration of hospital stay. Road traffic accidents were responsible for 1514 (66.40%) injuries. Five hundred and ten (22.37%) patients sustained injury due to a fall. Three hundred and ninety (68.59%) patients were discharged, 67 (11.69%) left the hospital against medical advice, 8 absconded from the trauma center, and 104 expired within the hospital.

Conclusion:

Traumatic brain injuries and orthopedic injuries constitute a majority of injured admitted to the trauma center. Motorcycle collision with other vehicles and pedestrian hits by other vehicles are the most common causes of traumatic brain injuries. In contrast to west, the most common cause of spinal cord injury was falls. Pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists are the vulnerable road users. Long time to admission is an alarming finding.

Opening a New Level II Trauma Center Near an Established Level I Trauma Center: Is This Good for Trauma Care?

OBJECTIVES

To describe how the initiation and later removal of a provisional level II trauma center (PL2TC) status at a community hospital affected the volume and severity of injured patients seen at an established academic level 1 trauma center (AL1TC).

METHODS

Census data including counts of injury ICD-9 codes and patients seen in the emergency department (ED) and trauma center at an AL1TC were collected monthly from January 2010 to October 2014. An interrupted time series analysis was used to model the monthly census data with 2 time interruptions to describe the change in patient volume at the interruptions. The interruptions were (1) the initiation of the PL2TC status at a nearby community hospital and (2) the subsequent removal of the PL2TC status.

RESULTS

The number of diagnoses, encounters, and patients seen at the AL1TC ED decreased while the PL2TC was operating. After the removal of the PL2TC status, there was a 19.4% increase in the ED patient volume per month at the AL1TC. The number of orthopaedic trauma patients seen through the ED at the AL1TC dropped 11.1% per month when the PL2TC began functioning as a trauma center. However, the volume of orthopaedic patients at the AL1TC did not recuperate after the PL2TC lost level 2 status.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant decrease in patient volume was seen at the AL1TC with the initiation of the PL2TC in close proximity. Orthopaedic patient volume did not recuperate after the removal of the PL2TC status.

Helicopters and injured kids: Improved survival with scene air medical transport in the pediatric trauma population

BACKGROUND

Helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) are frequently used to transport injured children, despite unclear evidence of benefit. The study objective was to evaluate the association of HEMS compared with ground emergency medical services (GEMS) transport with outcomes in a national sample of pediatric trauma patients.

METHODS

Patients 15 years or younger undergoing scene transport by HEMS or GEMS in the National Trauma Data Bank from 2007 to 2012 were included. Propensity score matching was used to match HEMS and GEMS patients for likelihood of HEMS transport based on demographics, prehospital physiology and time, injury severity, and geographic region. Absolute standardized differences of less than 0.1 indicated adequate covariate balance between groups after matching. The primary outcome was in-hospital survival, while the secondary outcome was discharge disposition in survivors. Conditional logistic regression determined the association between HEMS versus GEMS transport with outcomes while controlling for demographics, admission physiology, injury severity, nonaccidental trauma, and in-hospital complications not accounted for in the propensity score. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients with a transport time of greater than 15 minutes to capture patients with the potential for HEMS transport.

RESULTS

A total of 25,700 HEMS/GEMS pairs were matched from 166,594 patients. Groups were well matched, with all propensity score variables having absolute standardized differences of less than 0.1. In matched patients, HEMS was associated with a 72% increase in odds of survival compared with GEMS (adjusted odds ratio, 1.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-2.36; p < 0.01). Transport mode was not associated with discharge disposition (p = 0.47). Subgroup analysis included 17,657 HEMS/GEMS pairs. HEMS was again associated with a significant increase in odds of survival (adjusted odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-2.65; p < 0.01), while transport mode was not associated with discharge disposition (p = 0.58).

CONCLUSION

Scene transport by HEMS was associated with improved odds of survival compared with GEMS in pediatric trauma patients. Further study is warranted to understand the underlying mechanisms and develop specific triage criteria for HEMS transport in this population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, level III.

Global trends in trauma

Injuries cause about 10% of all deaths worldwide, with road traffic accidents, self-inflicted injuries, violence and war injuries being the most common causes of traumatic deaths. There is an anticipated increase in all of these categories by the year 2020. In addition to the increasing global incidence of trauma, other major trends in trauma and its management identified in this review include the growing emphasis on prevention and public health aspects of trauma, the globalization of trauma practices due to the rapid access to new information, a critical emphasis on organizational aspects of trauma care and education, the prominent role of efficacious and cost effective management practises, a shift to gentler treatment methods with less interference in the physiological recovery mechanisms, and at the same time, extreme care and the management of its consequences. In order to fight the global epidemic of trauma, it is the duty and the privilege of health care professionals to take the leadership in this task by ‘thinking globally and acting locally’ but most importantly by working together and sharing their expe riences (the successes and the failures) and by knowing that they can make a difference.

Explaining outcomes in major system change: a qualitative study of implementing centralised acute stroke services in two large metropolitan regions in England

Background

Implementing major system change in healthcare is not well understood. This gap may be addressed by analysing change in terms of interrelated components identified in the implementation literature, including decision to change, intervention selection, implementation approaches, implementation outcomes, and intervention outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study of two cases of major system change: the centralisation of acute stroke services in Manchester and London, which were associated with significantly different implementation outcomes (fidelity to referral pathway) and intervention outcomes (provision of evidence-based care, patient mortality). We interviewed stakeholders at national, pan-regional, and service-levels (n = 125) and analysed 653 documents. Using a framework developed for this study from the implementation science literature, we examined factors influencing implementation approaches; how these approaches interacted with the models selected to influence implementation outcomes; and their relationship to intervention outcomes.

Results

London and Manchester’s differing implementation outcomes were influenced by the different service models selected and implementation approaches used. Fidelity to the referral pathway was higher in London, where a ‘simpler’, more inclusive model was used, implemented with a ‘big bang’ launch and ‘hands-on’ facilitation by stroke clinical networks. In contrast, a phased approach of a more complex pathway was used in Manchester, and the network acted more as a platform to share learning. Service development occurred more uniformly in London, where service specifications were linked to financial incentives, and achieving standards was a condition of service launch, in contrast to Manchester. ‘Hands-on’ network facilitation, in the form of dedicated project management support, contributed to achievement of these standards in London; such facilitation processes were less evident in Manchester.

Conclusions

Using acute stroke service centralisation in London and Manchester as an example, interaction between model selected and implementation approaches significantly influenced fidelity to the model. The contrasting implementation outcomes may have affected differences in provision of evidence-based care and patient mortality. The framework used in this analysis may support planning and evaluating major system changes, but would benefit from application in different healthcare contexts.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0445-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Interhospital transfer for acute surgical care: does delay matter?

BACKGROUND

Delays to definitive care are associated with poor outcomes after trauma and medical emergencies. It is unknown whether inter-hospital transfer delays affect outcomes for nontraumatic acute surgical conditions.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patient transfers for acute surgical conditions within a regional transfer network from 2009 to 2013. Delay was defined as more than 24 hours from presentation to transfer request and categorized as 1 or 2+ days. The primary outcome was post-transfer death or hospice. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression were performed.

RESULTS

The cohort included 2,091 patient transfers. Delays of 2 or more days were associated with death or hospice in unadjusted analyses, but there was no difference after adjustment. Predictors of post-transfer death or hospice included older age, higher comorbidity scores, and greater severity of illness.

CONCLUSIONS

Delays in transfer request were not associated with post-transfer mortality or discharge to hospice, suggesting effective triage of nontraumatic acute surgical patients.

Volume-Mortality Relationships during Hospitalization with Severe Sepsis Exist Only at Low Case Volumes

RATIONALE

Volume-outcome associations have been demonstrated in conditions with high morbidity and mortality; however, the existing literature regarding such associations in sepsis is not definitive.

OBJECTIVES

To test the hypothesis that annual hospital severe sepsis case volume is associated with mortality during admissions with severe sepsis in teaching and nonteaching hospitals.

METHODS

This work was a retrospective cohort study of administrative data from the South Carolina State Inpatient Database using multivariate logistic regression and case mix adjustment.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In the calendar year 2010, 9,815 patients were admitted with severe sepsis or septic shock. Hospitals were stratified into low- (0-75 cases/yr, n = 26), intermediate- (76-300 cases/yr, n = 19), and high (>300 cases/yr, n = 12) -volume tertiles. Patients admitted to hospitals with a low annual case volume for sepsis had higher adjusted odds of dying before discharge (odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-1.94) compared with patients admitted to high-volume hospitals. Hospitalization at intermediate-volume hospitals was not associated with a difference in mortality (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.09) compared with high-volume hospitals. There was no difference between the mortality rates of intermediate- and high-volume hospitals at different severity of illness quartiles. Hospital length of stay differed significantly by hospital case volume (low = 8.0, intermediate = 12.7, high = 14.9 [d]; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitals with low annual sepsis case volume are associated with higher mortality rates, whereas hospitals with intermediate sepsis case volumes are associated with similar mortality rates compared with hospitals with high case volumes.

Demographic Patterns and Outcomes of Patients in Level I Trauma Centers in Three International Trauma Systems

Introduction

Trauma systems were developed to improve the care for the injured. The designation and elements comprising these systems vary across countries. In this study, we have compared the demographic patterns and patient outcomes of Level I trauma centers in three international trauma systems.

Methods

International multicenter prospective trauma registry-based study, performed in the University Medical Center Utrecht (UMCU), Utrecht, the Netherlands, John Hunter Hospital (JHH), Newcastle, Australia, and Harborview Medical Center (HMC), Seattle, the United States. Inclusion: patients ≥18 years, admitted in 2012, registered in the institutional trauma registry.

Results

In UMCU, JHH, and HMC, respectively, 955, 1146, and 4049 patients met the inclusion criteria of which 300, 412, and 1375 patients with Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15. Mean ISS was higher in JHH (13.5; p < 0.001) and HMC (13.4; p < 0.001) compared to UMCU (11.7). Unadjusted mortality: UMCU = 6.5 %, JHH = 3.6 %, and HMC = 4.8 %. Adjusted odds of death: JHH = 0.498 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.303–0.818] and HMC = 0.473 (95 % CI 0.325–0.690) compared to UMCU. HMC compared to JHH was 1.002 (95 % CI 0.664–1.514). Odds of death patients ISS > 15: JHH = 0.507 (95 % CI 0.300–0.857) and HMC = 0.451 (95 % CI 0.297–0.683) compared to UMCU. HMC = 0.931 (95 % CI 0.608–1.425) compared to JHH. TRISS analysis: UMCU: Ws = 0.787, Z = 1.31, M = 0.87; JHH, Ws = 3.583, Z = 6.7, M = 0.89; HMC, Ws = 3.902, Z = 14.6, M = 0.84.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated substantial differences across centers in patient characteristics and mortality, mainly of neurological cause. Future research must investigate whether the outcome differences remain with nonfatal and long-term outcomes. Furthermore, we must focus on the development of a more valid method to compare systems.

Geographic Variation in Outcome Benefits of Helicopter Transport for Trauma in the United States: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the effect of US geographic region on outcomes of helicopter transport (HT) for trauma.

BACKGROUND

HT is an integral component of trauma systems. Evidence suggests that HT is associated with improved outcomes; however, no studies examine the impact of geographic variation on outcomes for HT.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing scene HT or ground transport in the National Trauma Databank (2009-2012). Subjects were divided by US census region. HT and ground transport subjects were propensity-score matched based on prehospital physiology and injury severity. Conditional logistic regression was used to evaluate the effect of HT on survival and discharge to home in each region. Region-level characteristics were assessed as potential explanatory factors.

RESULTS

A total of 193,629 pairs were matched. HT was associated with increased odds of survival and discharge to home; however, the magnitude of these effects varied significantly across regions (P < 0.01). The South had the greatest survival benefit (odds ratio: 1.44; 95% confidence interval: 1.39-1.49, P < 0.01) and the Northeast had the greatest discharge to home benefit (odds ratio: 1.29; 95% confidence interval: 1.18-1.41, P < 0.01). A subset of region-level characteristics influenced the effect of HT on each outcome, including helicopter utilization, injury severity, trauma center and helicopter distribution, trauma center access, traffic congestion, and urbanicity (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Geographic region impacts the benefits of HT in trauma. Variations in resource allocation partially account for outcome differences. Policy makers should consider regional factors to better assess and allocate resources within trauma systems to optimize the role of HT.

Effect of an organizational change in a prehospital trauma care protocol and trauma transport directive in a large urban city: a before and after study

BACKGROUND

Trauma systems and regionalized trauma care have been shown to improve outcome in severely injured trauma patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of a prehospital trauma care protocol and transport directive, and to determine its effects on the number of primary admissions and secondary trauma transfers in a large Scandinavian city.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective observational study based on local trauma registries and hospital and ambulance records in Stockholm County; patients > 15 years of age with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15 transported to any emergency care hospitals in the Stockholm area were included for the years 2006 and 2008. We also included secondary transferred patients to the regional trauma center during 2006, 2008, and 2013.

RESULTS

A total of 693 primarily admitted trauma patients were included for the years 2006 and 2008. For the years 2006, 2008 and 2013, we included 114 secondarily transported trauma patients. The number of primary patient transports to the trauma center increased during the years by 20.2%, (p < 0.001); patients primarily transported to the trauma center had a significantly higher Injury Severity Score in 2008 than in 2006, and the number of patients transported secondarily to the trauma center in 2006 was higher compared to 2008 and to 2013 (p < 0.001, all 3 years).

DISCUSSION

Our data indicate that implementation of a prehospital trauma care protocol may have an effect on transportation of severely injured trauma patients. A decrease in secondarily transported trauma patients to the regional trauma center was noted after 1 year and persisted at 7 years after the organizational change. Patients primarily admitted to the trauma center after the change had more severe injuries than patients transported to other emergency hospitals in the area even if 20 % of patients were not admitted primarily to a trauma center. This does not imply that the transport directives or the criteria were not followed but rather reveals the difficulties and uncertainties of field triage.

CONCLUSIONS

With the introduction of a prehospital trauma transport directive in a large urban city, an increase in patients transported to the regional trauma center and a decrease in secondary transfers were detected, but a considerable number of severely injured patients were still transported to local hospitals.

Cost-Effectiveness of Field Trauma Triage among Injured Adults Served by Emergency Medical Services

BACKGROUND

The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma sets national targets for the accuracy of field trauma triage at ≥95% sensitivity and ≥65% specificity, yet the cost-effectiveness of realizing these goals is unknown. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of current field trauma triage practices compared with triage strategies consistent with the national targets.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a cost-effectiveness analysis using data from 79,937 injured adults transported by 48 emergency medical services agencies to 105 trauma and nontrauma hospitals in 6 regions of the western United States from 2006 through 2008. Incremental differences in survival, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (costs per QALY gained) were estimated for each triage strategy during a 1-year and lifetime horizon using a decision analytic Markov model. We considered an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio threshold of <$100,000 to be cost-effective.

RESULTS

For these 6 regions, a high-sensitivity triage strategy consistent with national trauma policy (sensitivity 98.6%, specificity 17.1%) would cost $1,317,333 per QALY gained, and current triage practices (sensitivity 87.2%, specificity 64.0%) cost $88,000 per QALY gained, compared with a moderate sensitivity strategy (sensitivity 71.2%, specificity 66.5%). Refining emergency medical services transport patterns by triage status improved cost-effectiveness. At the trauma-system level, a high-sensitivity triage strategy would save 3.7 additional lives per year at a 1-year cost of $8.78 million, and a moderate sensitivity approach would cost 5.2 additional lives and save $781,616 each year.

CONCLUSIONS

A high-sensitivity approach to field triage consistent with national trauma policy is not cost-effective. The most cost-effective approach to field triage appears closely tied to triage specificity and adherence to triage-based emergency medical services transport practices.

Implementation of an Acute Care Surgery Service in a Community Hospital: Impact on Hospital Efficiency and Patient Outcomes

A service led by acute care surgeons managing trauma, critically ill surgical, and emergency general surgery patients via an acute care surgery model of patient care improves hospital efficiency and patient outcomes at university-affiliated hospitals and American College of Surgeons–verified trauma centers. Our goal was to determine whether an acute care surgeon led service, entitled the Surgical Trauma and Acute Resuscitative Service (STARS) that implemented an acute care surgery model of patient care, could improve hospital efficiency and patient outcomes at a community hospital. A total of 492 patient charts were reviewed, which included 230 before the implementation of the STARS [pre-STARS (control)] and 262 after the implementation of the STARS [post-STARS (study)]. Demographics included age, gender, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation 2 score, and medical comorbidities. Efficiency data included length of stay in emergency department (ED-LOS), length of stay in surgical intensive care unit (SICU-LOS), and length of stay in hospital (H-LOS), and total in hospital charges. Average age was 64.1 + 16.4 years, 255 males (51.83%) and 237 females (48.17%). Average Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation 2 score was 11.9 + 5.8. No significant differences in demographics were observed. Average decreases in ED-LOS (9.7 + 9.6 hours, pre-STARS versus 6.6 + 4.5 hours, post-STARS), SICU-LOS (5.3 + 9.6 days, pre-STARS versus 3.5 + 4.8 days, post-STARS), H-LOS (12.4 + 12.7 days, pre-STARS versus 11.4 + 11.3 days, post-STARS), and total in hospital charges ($419,602.6 + $519,523.0 pre-STARS to $374,816.7 + $411,935.8 post-STARS) post-STARS. Regression analysis revealed decreased ED-LOS—2.9 hours [ P = 0.17; 95% confidence interval (CI): -7.0, 1.2], SICU-LOS—6.3 days ( P < 0.001; 95% CI: -9.3, -3.2), H-LOS—7.6 days ( P = 0.001; 95% CI: -12.1, -3.1), and 3.4 times greater odds of survival ( P = 0.04; 95% CI: 1.1, 10.7) post-STARS. In conclusion, implementation of the STARS improved hospital efficiency and patient outcomes at a community hospital.

Causes of death differ between elderly and adult falls

BACKGROUND

As the population ages, mortality from falls will soon exceed that from all other forms of injury. Tremendous resources are focused on this problem, but how these patients die is unclear. To fill this gap, we tested the hypothesis that falls among the elderly are related to patient, rather than to injury factors when compared with falls among younger adults.

METHODS

From January 2002 to December 2012, 7,293 fall admissions were reviewed. Data are reported as mean ± SD if normally distributed or median (interquartile range) if not.

RESULTS

In 2002 to 2007, 25% of all falls were in elderly patients (≥65 years), but in 2008 to 2012, this proportion increased to 30% (p < 0.001). When comparing adult (n = 5,216) with elderly (n = 2,077) admissions, characteristics were as follow: Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 8 (4-13) versus 9 (5-17), length of stay (in days) of 3 (1-7) versus 6 (2-11), and mortality of 3.8% versus 13.7% (all p < 0.001). After controlling for variables associated with mortality using multiple logistic regression, elderly age was the strongest independent predictor of mortality (odds ratio, 8.18; confidence interval, 4.88-13.71). When comparing adult (n = 198) with elderly (n = 285) fatalities, ground-level falls occurred in 31% versus 91%, ISS was 27 (25-41) versus 25 (16-36), and length of stay (in days) was 2 (0-6) versus 4 (1-11) (all p < 0.001). Death occurred directly from fall in 82% versus 63%, from complications in 10% versus 20%, and from a fatal event preceding the fall in 8% vs. 17% (all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The proportion of fall admissions in the elderly is growing in this trauma system. Elderly age is the strongest independent predictor of mortality following a fall. In those who die, death is less likely a direct effect of the fall.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Epidemiologic study, level III.

Helicopter emergency medical services for adults with major trauma

BACKGROUND

Although helicopters are presently an integral part of trauma systems in most developed nations, previous reviews and studies to date have raised questions about which groups of traumatically injured people derive the greatest benefit.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) transport, compared with ground emergency medical services (GEMS) transport, is associated with improved morbidity and mortality for adults with major trauma.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran the most recent search on 29 April 2015. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; CENTRAL), MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE Classic + EMBASE (OvidSP), CINAHL Plus (EBSCOhost), four other sources, and clinical trials registers. We screened reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible trials included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized intervention studies. We also evaluated nonrandomized studies (NRS), including controlled trials and cohort studies. Each study was required to have a GEMS comparison group. An Injury Severity Score (ISS) of at least 15 or an equivalent marker for injury severity was required. We included adults age 16 years or older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We applied the Downs and Black quality assessment tool for NRS. We analyzed the results in a narrative review, and with studies grouped by methodology and injury type. We constructed 'Summary of findings' tables in accordance with the GRADE Working Group criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 38 studies, of which 34 studies examined survival following transportation by HEMS compared with GEMS for adults with major trauma. Four studies were of inter-facility transfer to a higher level trauma center by HEMS compared with GEMS. All studies were NRS; we found no RCTs. The primary outcome was survival at hospital discharge. We calculated unadjusted mortality using data from 282,258 people from 28 of the 38 studies included in the primary analysis. Overall, there was considerable heterogeneity and we could not determine an accurate estimate of overall effect.Based on the unadjusted mortality data from six trials that focused on traumatic brain injury, there was no decreased risk of death with HEMS. Twenty-one studies used multivariate regression to adjust for confounding. Results varied, some studies found a benefit of HEMS while others did not. Trauma-Related Injury Severity Score (TRISS)-based analysis methods were used in 14 studies; studies showed survival benefits in both the HEMS and GEMS groups as compared with MTOS. We found no studies evaluating the secondary outcome, morbidity, as assessed by quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Four studies suggested a small to moderate benefit when HEMS was used to transfer people to higher level trauma centers. Road traffic and helicopter crashes are adverse effects which can occur with either method of transport. Data regarding safety were not available in any of the included studies. Overall, the quality of the included studies was very low as assessed by the GRADE Working Group criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Due to the methodological weakness of the available literature, and the considerable heterogeneity of effects and study methodologies, we could not determine an accurate composite estimate of the benefit of HEMS. Although some of the 19 multivariate regression studies indicated improved survival associated with HEMS, others did not. This was also the case for the TRISS-based studies. All were subject to a low quality of evidence as assessed by the GRADE Working Group criteria due to their nonrandomized design. The question of which elements of HEMS may be beneficial has not been fully answered. The results from this review provide motivation for future work in this area. This includes an ongoing need for diligent reporting of research methods, which is imperative for transparency and to maximize the potential utility of results. Large, multicenter studies are warranted as these will help produce more robust estimates of treatment effects. Future work in this area should also examine the costs and safety of HEMS, since multiple contextual determinants must be considered when evaluating the effects of HEMS for adults with major trauma.

Direct (presenting primarily to trauma center) versus indirect (referred or transferred) admission of patients to the Trauma Centre of King George Medical University: One-year prospective pilot study

Background:

India does not have a trauma registry. There is lack of base line demographic data of trauma victims that present directly to the trauma center and those that are transferred to the trauma center.

Aim:

To compare the clinical and demographic profile of directly admitted (presenting primarily to the trauma center) and referred (transferred to trauma center) patients at the trauma centre of King George Medical University.

Materials and Methods:

The demographic and clinical profiles of patients admitted on thirty-three consecutive Mondays were collected and compared. In addition, the demographic data of patients admitted on Mondays and eight randomly selected Wednesdays and Saturdays were analyzed to ascertain the representativeness of the studied sample.

Results:

Of the 572 patients in the study, 327 were referred and 245 were directly admitted. There was 27% mortality in the referred group and 22% mortality in the directly admitted group, the difference been statistically insignificant (P value 0.20). Patients referred from peripheral hospitals were more severely injured with a lower GCS and a higher TRISS, and had a higher proportion of multi system major trauma and severe head injury.

Conclusion:

Referred admitted (transferred) patients at the KGMU trauma center are more seriously injured than the patients presenting directly. Yet there is no statistically significant difference in the overall mortality. A future study focusing on certain sub-categories of patients such as those demonstrating subdural hematoma, GCS less than 9 or ISS more than 15 may yield interesting data.

County-Level Effects of Prehospital Regionalization of Critically Ill Patients: A Simulation Study

OBJECTIVE

Regionalization may improve critical care delivery, yet stakeholders cite concerns about its feasibility. We sought to determine the operational effects of prehospital regionalization of nontrauma, nonarrest critical illness.

SETTING

King County, Washington.

DESIGN

Discrete event simulation study.

PATIENTS

All 2006 hospital discharge data, linked to all adult, eligible patients transported by county emergency medical services agencies.

INTERVENTIONS

We simulated active triage of high-risk patients to designated referral centers using a validated prehospital risk score; we studied three regionalization scenarios: 1) up triage, 2) up and down triage, and 3) up and down triage after reducing ICU beds by 25%. We determined the effect on patient routing, ICU occupancy at referral and nonreferral hospitals, and emergency medical services transport times.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 119,117 patients were hospitalized at 11 nonreferral centers and 76,817 patients were hospitalized at three referral centers. Among 20,835 emergency medical services patients, 7,817 patients (43%) were eligible for up triage and 10,242 patients (57%) were eligible for down triage. At baseline, mean daily ICU bed occupancy was 61% referral and 47% at nonreferral hospitals. Up triage increased referral ICU occupancy to 68%, up and down triage to 64%, and up and down triage with bed reduction to 74%. Mean daily nonreferral ICU occupancy did not exceed 60%. Total emergency medical services transport time increased by less than 3% with up and down triage.

CONCLUSIONS

Regionalization based on prehospital triage of the critically ill can allocate high-risk patients to referral hospitals without adversely affecting ICU occupancy or prehospital travel time.

Spatial Access to Emergency Services in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A GIS-Based Analysis

Injury is a leading cause of the global disease burden, accounting for 10 percent of all deaths worldwide. Despite 90 percent of these deaths occurring in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), the majority of trauma research and infrastructure development has taken place in high-income settings. Furthermore, although accessible services are of central importance to a mature trauma system, there remains a paucity of literature describing the spatial accessibility of emergency services in LMICs. Using data from the Service Provision Assessment component of the Demographic and Health Surveys of Namibia and Haiti we defined the capabilities of healthcare facilities in each country in terms of their preparedness to provide emergency services. A Geographic Information System-based network analysis method was used to define 5- 10- and 50-kilometer catchment areas for all facilities capable of providing 24-hour care, higher-level resuscitative services or tertiary care. The proportion of a country's population with access to each level of service was obtained by amalgamating the catchment areas with a population layer. A significant proportion of the population of both countries had poor spatial access to lower level services with 25% of the population of Haiti and 51% of the population of Namibia living further than 50 kilometers from a facility capable of providing 24-hour care. Spatial access to tertiary care was considerably lower with 51% of Haitians and 72% of Namibians having no access to these higher-level services within 50 kilometers. These results demonstrate a significant disparity in potential spatial access to emergency services in two LMICs compared to analogous estimates from high-income settings, and suggest that strengthening the capabilities of existing facilities may improve the equity of emergency services in these countries. Routine collection of georeferenced patient and facility data in LMICs will be important to understanding how spatial access to services influences outcomes.

Helicopter transport improves survival following injury in the absence of a time-saving advantage

BACKGROUND

Although survival benefits have been shown at the population level, it remains unclear what drives the outcome benefits for helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) in trauma. Although speed is often cited as the vital factor of HEMS, we hypothesized a survival benefit would exist in the absence of a time savings over ground emergency medical services (GEMS). The objective was to examine the association of survival with HEMS compared with GEMS transport across similar prehospital transport times.

METHODS

We used a retrospective cohort of scene HEMS and GEMS transports in the National Trauma Databank (2007-2012). Propensity score matching was used to match HEMS and GEMS subjects on the likelihood of HEMS transport. Subjects were stratified by prehospital transport times in 5-minute increments. Conditional logistic regression determined the association of HEMS with survival across prehospital transport times strata controlling for confounders. Transport distance was estimated from prehospital transport times and average HEMS/GEMS transport speeds.

RESULTS

There were 155,691 HEMS/GEMS pairs matched. HEMS had a survival benefit over GEMS for prehospital transport times between 6 and 30 minutes. This benefit ranged from a 46% increase in odds of survival between 26 and 30 minutes (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.46; 95% CI, 1.11-1.93; P < .01) to an 80% increase in odds of survival between 16 and 20 minutes (AOR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.51-2.14; P < .01). This prehospital transport times window corresponds to estimated transport distance between 14.3 and 71.3 miles for HEMS and 3.3 and 16.6 miles for GEMS.

CONCLUSION

When stratified by prehospital transport times, HEMS had a survival benefit concentrated in a window between 6 and 30 minutes. Because there was no time-savings advantage for HEMS, these findings may reflect care delivered by HEMS providers.

Is computerized tomography of trauma patients associated with a transfer delay to a regional trauma centre?

Objective:

Many trauma patients undergo advanced diagnostic imaging before being transferred to a regional trauma centre, but this step can delay definitive care. This study compared the length-of-stay at the primary hospital between patients who underwent CT scans and those who did not.

Methods:

This was a medical record review of all consecutive trauma cases transferred to a regional trauma centre servicing 2.2 million people during a 2-year period. Two trained abstractors, blind to each other's results, collected data independently.

Results:

Of 249 cases, 79 (31%) underwent a CT scan before being transferred. There was no significant difference in the Injury Severity Score between the 2 groups (p = 0.16), yet the CT group remained at the primary hospital approximately 90 minutes longer before transfer (p &lt; 0.001).

Conclusion:

A significant proportion of trauma patients transferred to a regional trauma centre undergo CT scanning at the primary hospital. These patients experience an increased length-of-stay of 90 minutes, on average, before transfer. This appears to be a common practice that does not appear to contribute to definitive trauma management.

Impact of prehospital transfer strategies in major trauma and head injury: systematic review, meta-analysis, and recommendations for study design

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether trauma patients should be transferred initially to a trauma center or local hospital.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the evidence for direct transport to specialist centers (SCs) versus initial stabilization at non-SCs (NSCs) for major trauma or moderate-to-severe head injury. Nine databases were searched from 1988 to 2012. Limitations in the study design informed recommendations for future studies.

RESULTS

Of 19 major trauma studies, five (n = 19,910) included patients not transferred to SCs and adjusted for case mix. Meta-analysis showed no difference in mortality for initial triage to NSCs versus SCs (odds ratio [OR] 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.23). Within studies excluding patients not transferred to SCs, unadjusted analyses of mortality nonsignificantly favored transfer via NSCs (16 studies; n = 37,079; OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.68-1.01), whereas adjusted analysis nonsignificantly favored direct triage to SCs (9 studies; n = 34,266; OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.96-1.44). Of 11 head injury studies, all excluded patients not transferred to SCs and half were in remote locations. There was no significant mortality difference between initial triage to NSCs versus SCs within adjusted analyses (3 studies; n = 1,507; OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.31-1.79) or unadjusted analyses (10 studies; n = 3,671; OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.62-1.23).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review demonstrated no difference in outcomes for direct transport to a trauma center versus initial triage to a local hospital. Many studies had significant limitations in the design, and heterogeneity was high. Recommendations for future studies include the following: (i) inclusion of patients not transferred to SCs and those dying during transport; (ii) clear description of centers plus transport distances/times; (iii) adjustments for case mix; and (iv) assessment of morbidity and mortality.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review, level IV.

Emergency department transfers and transfer relationships in United States hospitals

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to describe transfers out of hospital-based emergency departments (EDs) in the United States and to identify different characteristics of sending and receiving hospitals, travel distance during transfer, disposition on arrival to the second hospital, and median number of transfer partners among sending hospitals.

METHODS

Emergency department records were linked at transferring hospitals to ED and inpatient records at receiving hospitals in nine U.S. states using the 2010 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) State Emergency Department Databases and State Inpatient Databases, the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, and the Trauma Information Exchange Program. Using the Clinical Classification Software (CCS) to categorize conditions, the 50 disease categories with the highest transfer rates were studied, and these were then placed into nine clinical groups. Records were included where both sending and receiving records were available; these data were tabulated to describe ED transfer patterns, hospital-to-hospital distances, final patient disposition, and number of transfer partners.

RESULTS

A total of 97,021 ED transfer encounters were included in the analysis from the 50 highest transfer rate disease categories. Among these, transfer rates ranged from 1% to 13%. Circulatory conditions made up about half of all transfers. Receiving hospitals were more likely to be nonprofit, teaching, trauma, and urban and have more beds with greater specialty coverage and more advanced diagnostic and therapeutic resources. The median transfer distance was 23 miles, with 25% traveling more than 40 to 50 miles. About 8% of transferred encounters were discharged from the second ED, but that varied from 0.6% to 53% across the 50 conditions. Sending hospitals had a median of seven transfer partners across all conditions and between one and four per clinical group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among high-transfer conditions in U.S. EDs, patients are often transferred great distances, more commonly to large teaching hospitals with greater resources. The large number of transfer partners indicates a possible lack of stable transfer relationships between U.S. hospitals.

The transfer instability index: a novel metric of emergency department transfer relationships

OBJECTIVES

In this study, the objective was to characterize emergency department (ED) transfer relationships and study the factors that predict the stability of those relationships. A metric is derived for ED transfer relationships that may be useful in assessing emergency care regionalization and as a resource for future emergency medicine research.

METHODS

Emergency department records at transferring hospitals were linked to ED and inpatient records at receiving hospitals in nine U.S. states using the 2010 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Emergency Department Databases and State Inpatient Databases, the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, and the Trauma Information Exchange Program. Using the Clinical Classification Software to categorize conditions, high transfer rate conditions were placed into nine clinical groups. The authors created a new measure, the "transfer instability index," which estimates the effective number of "transfer partners" for each sending ED: this is designed to measure the stability of outgoing transfer relationships, where higher values of the index indicate less stable relationships. The index provides a measure of how many hospitals a transferring hospital sends its patients to (weighted by how often each transfer partner is used). Regression was used to analyze factors associated with higher values of the index.

RESULTS

Sending hospitals had a median of 3.5 effective transfer partners across all conditions. The calculated transfer instability indices varied from 1 to 2.4 across disease categories. In general, higher index values were associated with treating a higher proportion of publicly insured patients: 10 and 12% increases in the Medicare and Medicaid share of ED encounters, respectively, were associated with 10 and 14% increases in the effective number of transfer partners. This public insurance effect held while studying all conditions together as well as within individual disease categories, such as cardiac, neurologic, and traumatic conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

United States EDs that transfer patients to other hospitals often have multiple transfer partners. The stability of the transfer relationship, assessed by the transfer instability index, differs by condition. Less stable transfer relationships (i.e., hospitals with greater numbers of transfer partners) were more common in EDs with higher proportions of publicly insured patients.

Understanding traumatic shock: out-of-hospital hypotension with and without other physiologic compromise

BACKGROUND

Among trauma patients with out-of-hospital hypotension, we evaluated the predictive value of systolic blood pressure (SBP) with and without other physiologic compromise for identifying trauma patients requiring early critical resources.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort of injured patients 13 years or older with out-of-hospital hypotension (SBP ≤ 90 mm Hg) who were transported by 114 emergency medical service agencies to 56 Level I and II trauma centers in 11 regions of the United States and Canada from January 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011. The primary outcome was early critical resource use, defined as blood transfusion of 6 U or greater, major nonorthopedic surgery, interventional radiology, or death within 24 hours.

RESULTS

Of 3,337 injured patients with out-of-hospital hypotension, 1,094 (33%) required early critical resources and 1,334 (40%) had serious injury (Injury Severity Score [ISS] ≥ 16). Patients with isolated hypotension required less early critical resources (14% vs. 52%), had less serious injury (20% vs. 61%), and had lower mortality (24 hours, 1% vs. 26%; in-hospital, 3% vs. 34%). The standardized probability of requiring early critical resources was lowest among patients with blunt injury and isolated moderate hypotension (0.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.15) and steadily increased with additional physiologic compromise, more severe hypotension, and penetrating injury (0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-0.98).

CONCLUSION

A minority of trauma patients with isolated out-of-hospital hypotension require early critical resuscitation resources. However, hypotension accompanied by additional physiologic compromise or penetrating injury markedly increases the probability of requiring time-sensitive interventions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study, level II.

Revisiting the "Golden Hour": An Evaluation of Out-of-Hospital Time in Shock and Traumatic Brain Injury

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We evaluate patients with shock and traumatic brain injury who were previously enrolled in an out-of-hospital clinical trial to test the association between out-of-hospital time and outcome.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of patients with shock and traumatic brain injury who were aged 15 years or older and enrolled in a Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium out-of-hospital clinical trial by 81 emergency medical services agencies transporting to 46 Level I and II trauma centers in 11 sites (May 2006 through May 2009). Inclusion criteria were systolic blood pressure less than or equal to 70 mm Hg or systolic blood pressure 71 to 90 mm Hg with pulse rate greater than or equal to 108 beats/min (shock cohort) and Glasgow Coma Scale score less than or equal to 8 (traumatic brain injury cohort); patients meeting both criteria were placed in the shock cohort. Primary outcomes were 28-day mortality (shock cohort) and 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score less than or equal to 4 (traumatic brain injury cohort).

RESULTS

There were 778 patients in the shock cohort (26% 28-day mortality) and 1,239 patients in the traumatic brain injury cohort (53% 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score ≤4). Out-of-hospital time greater than 60 minutes was not associated with worse outcomes after accounting for important confounders in the shock cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77 to 2.62) or traumatic brain injury cohort (aOR 0.77; 95% CI 0.51 to 1.15). However, shock patients requiring early critical hospital resources and arriving after 60 minutes had higher 28-day mortality (aOR 2.37; 95% CI 1.05 to 5.37); this finding was not observed among a similar traumatic brain injury subgroup.

CONCLUSION

Among out-of-hospital trauma patients meeting physiologic criteria for shock and traumatic brain injury, there was no association between time and outcome. However, the subgroup of shock patients requiring early critical resources and arriving after 60 minutes had higher mortality.

Do trauma systems work? A comparison of major trauma outcomes between Aberdeen Royal Infirmary and Massachusetts General Hospital

Trauma is an important matter of public health and a major cause of mortality. Since the late 1980s trauma care provision in the United Kingdom is lacking when compared to the USA. This has been attributed to a lack of organisation of trauma care leading to the formation of trauma networks and Major Trauma Centres in England and Wales. The need for similar centres in Scotland is argued currently. We assessed the activity of two quite different trauma systems by obtaining access to comparative data from two hospitals, one in the USA and the other in Scotland. Aggregate data on 5604 patients at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary (ARI) from 1993 to 2002 was obtained from the Scottish Trauma Audit Group. A comparable data set of 16,178 patients from Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH). Direct comparison of patient demographics; injury type, mechanism and Injury Severity Score (ISS); mode of arrival; length of stay and mortality were made. Statistical analysis was carried out using Chi-squared and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel. There were significant differences in the data sets. There was a higher proportion of penetrating injuries at MGH, (8.6% vs 2.6%) and more severely injured patients at MGH, patients with an ISS>16 accounted for nearly 22.1% of MGH patients compared to 14.0% at ARI. ISS 8-15 made up 54.6% of ARI trauma with 29.6% at MGH. Falls accounted for 50.1% at ARI and 37.9% at MGH. Despite the higher proportion of severe injuries at MGH and crude mortality rates showing no difference (4.9% ARI vs 5.2% MGH), pooled odds ratio of mortality was 1.4 (95% confidence interval 1.2-1.6) showing worse mortality outcomes at ARI compared to MGH. In conclusion, there were some differences in case mix between both data sets making direct comparison of the outcomes difficult, but the effect of consolidating major trauma on the proportion and number of severely injured patients treated in the American Level 1 centre was clear with a significant improvement in mortality in all injury severity groups.

The contribution of the Israeli trauma system to the survival of road traffic casualties

BACKGROUND

According to the World Health Organization, over one million people die annually from traffic crashes, in which over half are pedestrians, bicycle riders and two-wheel motor vehicles. In Israel, during the last decade, mortality from traffic crashes has decreased from 636 in 1998 to 288 in 2011. Professionals attribute the decrease in mortality to enforcement, improved infrastructure and roads and behavioral changes among road users, while no credit is given to the trauma system. Trauma systems which care for severe and critical casualties improve the injury outcomes and reduce mortality among road casualties.

GOALS

1) To evaluate the contribution of the Israeli Health System, especially the trauma system, on the reduction in mortality among traffic casualties. 2) To evaluate the chance of survival among hospitalized traffic casualties, according to age, gender, injury severity and type of road user.

METHODS

A retrospective study based on the National Trauma Registry, 1998-2011, including hospitalization data from eight hospitals.

OUTCOMES

During the study period, the Trauma Registry included 262,947 hospitalized trauma patients, of which 25.3% were due to a road accident. During the study period, a 25% reduction in traffic related mortality was reported, from 3.6% in 1998 to 2.7% in 2011. Among severe and critical (ISS 16+) casualties the reduction in mortality rates was even more significant, 41%; from 18.6% in 1998 to 11.0% in 2011. Among severe and critical pedestrian injuries, a 44% decrease was reported (from 29.1% in 1998 to 16.2% in 2011) and a 65% reduction among bicycle injuries. During the study period, the risk of mortality decreased by over 50% from 1998 to 2011 (OR 0.44 95% 0.33-0.59. In addition, a simulation was conducted to determine the impact of the trauma system on mortality of hospitalized road casualties. Presuming that the mortality rate remained constant at 18.6% and without any improvement in the trauma system, in 2011 there would have been 182 in-hospital deaths compared to the actual 108 traffic related deaths. A 41% difference was noted between the actual number of deaths and the expected number.

CONCLUSIONS

This study clearly shows that without any improvement in the health system, specifically the trauma system, the number of traffic deaths would be considerably greater. Although the health system has a significant contribution on reducing mortality, it does not receive the appropriate acknowledgment or resources for its proportion in the fight against traffic accidents.

The cost of overtriage: more than one-third of low-risk injured patients were taken to major trauma centers

Regionalized trauma care has been widely implemented in the United States, with field triage by emergency medical services (EMS) playing an important role in identifying seriously injured patients for transport to major trauma centers. In this study we estimated hospital-level differences in the adjusted cost of acute care for injured patients transported by 94 EMS agencies to 122 hospitals in 7 regions, overall and by injury severity. Among 301,214 patients, the average adjusted per episode cost of care was $5,590 higher in a level 1 trauma center than in a nontrauma hospital. We found hospital-level differences in cost among patients with minor, moderate, and serious injuries. Of the 248,342 low-risk patients-those who did not meet field triage guidelines for transport to trauma centers-85,155 (34.3 percent) were still transported to major trauma centers, accounting for up to 40 percent of acute injury costs. Adhering to field triage guidelines that minimize the overtriage of low-risk injured patients to major trauma centers could save up to $136.7 million annually in the seven regions we studied.

Evaluating initial spine trauma response: injury time to trauma center in PA, USA

Historical perceptions regarding the severity of traumatic spinal cord injury has led to considerable disparity in triage to tertiary care centers. This article retrospectively reviews a large regional trauma database to analyze whether the diagnosis of spinal trauma affected patient transfer timing and patterns. The Pennsylvania Trauma database was retrospectively reviewed. All acute trauma patient entries for level I and II centers were categorized for diagnosis, mechanism, and location of injury, analyzing transportation modality and its influence on time of arrival. A total of 1162 trauma patients were identified (1014 blunt injuries, 135 penetrating injuries and 12 other) with a mean transport time of 3.9 hours and a majority of patients arriving within 7 hours (>75%). Spine trauma patients had the longest mean arrival time (5.2 hours) compared to blunt trauma (4.2 hours), cranial neurologic injuries (4.35 hours), and penetrating injuries (2.13 hours, p<0.0001). There was a statistically significant correlation between earlier arrivals and both cranial trauma (p=0.0085) and penetrating trauma (p<0.0001). The fastest modality was a fire rescue (0.93 hours) or police (0.63 hours) vehicle with Philadelphia County (1.1 hour) having the quickest arrival times. Most trauma patients arrived to a specialty center within 7 hours of injury. However subsets analysis revealed that spine trauma patients had the greatest transit times. Present research trials for spinal cord injuries suggest earlier intervention may lead to improved recovery. Therefore, it is important to focus on improvement of the transportation triage system for traumatic spinal patients.

Consequences of increased use of computed tomography imaging for trauma patients in rural referring hospitals prior to transfer to a regional trauma centre

BACKGROUND

Computed tomography (CT) plays an integral role in the evaluation and management of trauma patients. As the number of referring hospital (RH)-based CT scanners increased, so has their utilization in trauma patients before transfer. We hypothesized that this has resulted in increased time at RH, image duplication, and radiation dose.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was completed for trauma activations transferred to an ACS-verified Level II Trauma Centre (TC) during two time periods: 2002-2004 (Group 1) and 2006-2008 (Group 2). 2005 data were excluded as this marked the transition period for acquisition of hospital-based CT scanners in RH. Statistical analysis included t test and χ(2) analysis. P<0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

1017 patients met study criteria: 503 in group 1 and 514 in group 2. Mean age was greater in group 2 compared to group 1 (40.3 versus 37.4, respectively; P=0.028). There were 115 patients in group 1 versus 202 patients in group 2 who underwent CT imaging at RH (P<0.001). Conversely, 326 patients in group 1 had CT scans performed at the TC versus 258 patients in group 2 (P<0.001). Mean time at the RH was similar between the groups (117.1 and 112.3min for group 1 and 2, respectively; P=0.561). However, when comparing patients with and without a pretransfer CT at the RH, the median time at RH was 140 versus 67min, respectively (P<0.001). The number of patients with duplicate CT imaging (n=34 in group 1 and n=42 in group 2) was not significantly different between the two time periods (P=0.392). Head CTs comprised the majority of duplicate CT imaging in both time periods (82.4% in group 1 and 90.5% in group 2). Mean total estimated radiation dose per patient was not significantly different between the two groups (group 1=8.4mSv versus group 2=7.8mSv; P=0.192).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant increase in CT imaging at the RH prior to transfer to the TC was observed over the study periods. No associated increases in mean time at the RH, image duplication at TC, total estimated radiation dose per patient, and mortality rate were observed.

Technology for trauma: testing the validity of a smartphone app for pre-hospital clinicians

INTRODUCTION

With the introduction of regional trauma networks in England, ambulance clinicians have been required to make triage decisions relating to severity of injury, and appropriate destination for the patient, which may require 'bypassing' the nearest Emergency Department. A 'Trauma Unit Bypass Tool' is utilised in this process. The Major Trauma Triage tool smartphone application (App) is a digital representation of a tool, available for clinicians to use on their smartphone. Prior to disseminating the application, validity and performance against the existing paper-based tool was explored.

METHODS

A case-based study using clinical scenarios was conducted. Scenarios, with appropriate triage decisions, were agreed by an expert panel. Ambulance clinicians were assigned to either the paper-based tool or smartphone app group and asked to make a triage decision using the available information. The positive predictive value (PPV) of each tool was calculated.

RESULTS

The PPV of the paper tool was 0.76 and 0.86 for the smartphone app. User comments were mainly positive for both tools with no negative comments relating to the smartphone app.

CONCLUSION

The smartphone app version of the Trauma Unit Bypass Tool performs at least as well as the paper version and can be utilised safely by pre-hospital clinicians in supporting triage decisions relating to potential major trauma.

Impact of the Establishment of a Specialty Hernia Referral Center

Background. Creating a surgical specialty referral center requires a strong interest, expertise, and a market demand in that particular field, as well as some form of promotion. In 2004, we established a tertiary hernia referral center. Our goal in this study was to examine its impact on institutional volume and economics. Materials and methods. The database of all hernia repairs (2004-2011) was reviewed comparing hernia repair type and volume and center financial performance. The ventral hernia repair (VHR) patient subset was further analyzed with particular attention paid to previous repairs, comorbidities, referral patterns, and the concomitant involvement of plastic surgery. Results. From 2004 to 2011, 4927 hernia repairs were performed: 39.3% inguinal, 35.5% ventral or incisional, 16.2% umbilical, 5.8% diaphragmatic, 1.6% femoral, and 1.5% other. Annual billing increased yearly from 7% to 85% and averaged 37% per year. Comparing 2004 with 2011, procedural volume increased 234%, and billing increased 713%. During that period, there was a 2.5-fold increase in open VHRs, and plastic surgeon involvement increased almost 8-fold, ( P = .004). In 2005, 51 VHR patients had a previous repair, 27.0% with mesh, versus 114 previous VHR in 2011, 58.3% with mesh ( P < .0001). For VHR, in-state referrals from 2004 to 2011 increased 340% while out-of-state referrals jumped 580%. In 2011, 21% of all patients had more than 4 comorbidities, significantly increased from 2004 ( P = .02). Conclusion. The establishment of a tertiary, regional referral center for hernia repair has led to a substantial increase in surgical volume, complexity, referral geography, and financial benefit to the institution.

Evaluation of trauma care in a mature level I trauma center in the Netherlands: outcomes in a Dutch mature level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

Trauma centers are associated with improved survival rates and outcomes in trauma patients. In 2000 our hospital officially became a level I trauma center. The implementation of the trauma center model showed a significant reduction in mortality and hospital length of stay in our hospital and throughout the trauma region. The aim of the present prospective database study was to present the outcomes of patients treated during the course of further maturation of a level I trauma center.

METHODS

We performed the prospective database study and included and analyzed outcome data for all adult trauma patients admitted to our trauma center during the years 2003 through 2006 (period 1) and 2007 through 2010 (period 2).

RESULTS

A total of 5,299 patients were included; 2,419 in period 1 and 2,880 in period 2. Mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) increased from 12.6 to 13.8 (p < 0.001). Mean Revised Trauma Score decreased from 7.4 to 7.2 (p < 0.001). Penetrating injuries increased from 111 (4.6 %) to 192 (6.7 %) (p < 0.001). More head injuries (+7.2 %) and spine injuries (+3.1 %), and fewer injuries to extremities (-6.5 %) were seen in the second period. Mortality, adjusted for age and ISS, was lower in period 2 (odds ratio [OR]: 0.736, p = 0.010). Adjusted for age, ISS, and survival, both the hospital stay and the intensive care unit stay were shortened (OR: 1.068, p < 0.018; OR: 1.188, p = 0.007). Mean probability of survival was significantly higher in the second period. Moreover, more unexpected survivors were seen in the second period (Z-score of 3.4 and W-value of 1.46).

CONCLUSIONS

Maturation of the trauma center and the trauma system resulted in improved patient outcomes. A significant increase in unexpected survivors was noted, and shorter hospital stay and ICU stay were achieved. Of note, population-based studies on trauma system and trauma center performance with statistical analysis by logistic regression are considered strong class III evidence.

The association of trauma center closures with increased inpatient mortality for injured patients

BACKGROUND

Trauma centers are an effective but costly element of the US health care infrastructure. Some Level I and II trauma centers regularly incur financial losses when these high fixed costs are coupled with high burdens of uncompensated care for disproportionately young and uninsured trauma patients. As a result, they are at risk of reducing their services or closing. The impact of these closures on patient outcomes, however, has not been previously assessed.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of all adult patient visits for injuries at Level I and II, nonfederal trauma centers in California between 1999 and 2009. Within this population, we compared the in-hospital mortality of patients whose drive time to their nearest trauma center increased as the result of a nearby closure with those whose drive time did not increase using a multivariate logit-linked generalized linear model. Our sensitivity analysis tested whether this effect was limited to a 2-year period following a closure.

RESULTS

The odds of inpatient mortality increased by 21% (odds ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.40) among trauma patients who experienced an increased drive time to their nearest trauma center as a result of a closure. The sensitivity analyses showed an even larger effect in the 2 years immediately following a closure, during which patients with increased drive time had 29% higher odds of inpatient death (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.51).

CONCLUSION

Our results show a strong association between closure of trauma centers in California and increased mortality for patients with injuries who have to travel further for definitive trauma care. These adverse impacts were intensified within 2 years of a closure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and epidemiologic, level III.

A profile of acute care in an aging America: snowball sample identification and characterization of United States geriatric emergency departments in 2013

BACKGROUND

The aging of America poses a challenge to emergency departments (EDs). Studies show that elderly patients have poor outcomes despite increased testing, prolonged periods of observation, and higher admission rates. In response, emergency medicine (EM) leaders have implemented strategies for improved ED elder care, enhancing expertise, equipment, policies, and protocols. One example is the development of geriatric EDs gaining in popularity nationwide. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first research to systematically identify and qualitatively characterize the existence, locations, and features of geriatric EDs across the United States.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine the number, distribution, and characteristics of geriatric EDs in the United States in 2013.

METHODS

This was a survey with potential respondents identified via a snowball sampling of known geriatric EDs, EM professional organizations' geriatric interest groups, and a structured search of the Internet using multiple search engines. Sites were contacted by telephone, and those confirming geriatric EDs presence received the survey via e-mail. Category questions included date of opening, location, volumes, staffing, physical plant changes, screening tools, policies, and protocols. Categories were reported based on general interest to those seeking to understand components of a geriatric ED.

RESULTS

Thirty-six hospitals confirmed geriatric ED existence and received surveys. Thirty (83%) responded to the survey and confirmed presence or plans for geriatric EDs: 24 (80%) had existing geriatric EDs, and six (20%) were planning to open geriatric EDs by 2014. The majority of geriatric EDs are located in the Midwest (46%) and Northeast (30%) regions of the United States. Eighty percent serve from 5,000 to 20,000 elder patients annually. Seventy percent of geriatric EDs are attached to the main ED, and 66% have from one to 10 geriatric beds. Physical plant changes include modifications to beds (96%), lighting (90%), flooring (83%), visual aids (73%), and sound level (70%). Seventy-seven percent have staff overlapping with the nongeriatric portion of their ED, and 80% require geriatric staff didactics. Sixty-seven percent of geriatric EDs report discharge planning for geriatric ED patients, and 90% of geriatric EDs had direct follow-up through patient callbacks.

CONCLUSIONS

The snowball sample identification of U.S. geriatric EDs resulted in 30 confirmed respondents. There is significant variation in the components constituting a geriatric ED. The United States should consider external validation of self-identified geriatric EDs to standardize the quality and type of care patients can expect from an institution with an identified geriatric ED.

Variation in prehospital use and uptake of the national Field Triage Decision Scheme

BACKGROUND

The Field Triage Decision Scheme is a national guideline that has been implemented widely for prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) and trauma systems. However, little is known about the uptake, modification, or variation in field application of triage criteria between trauma systems.

OBJECTIVE

To describe and compare the use of field triage criteria by EMS personnel in six regions, including the timing of guideline uptake and the use of nonguideline criteria.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of injured children and adults transported by 48 EMS agencies to 105 hospitals (trauma centers and non-trauma centers) in six Western U.S. regions from 2006 through 2008. We used probabilistic linkage to match patient-level prehospital information from multiple sources, including EMS records, base-hospital phone communication records, and trauma registry data files. Triage criteria were evaluated individually and grouped by "steps" (physiologic, anatomic, mechanism, and special considerations). We used descriptive statistics to compare the frequency of triage criteria use (overall and between regions) and to evaluate the timing of guideline uptake across multiple versions of the guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 260,027 injured patients were evaluated and transported by EMS over the three-year study period, of whom 46,414 (18%) met at least one field triage criterion and formed the primary sample for analysis. The three most common criteria cited (of 33 in use) were EMS provider judgment (26%), age <5 or >55 years (10%), and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score <14 (9%). Of the 33 criteria in use, five (15%) were previously retired from the guidelines and seven (21%) were never included in the guidelines. 11,048 (24%) patients had more than one criterion applied (range 1-21). There was large variation in the type and frequency of criteria used between systems, particularly among the nonphysiologic triage steps. Only one of six regions had translated the most recent guidelines into field use within two years after release.

CONCLUSION

There is large variation between regions in the frequency and type of field triage criteria used. Field uptake of guideline revisions appears to be slow and variable, suggesting opportunities for improvement in dissemination and implementation of updated guidelines.

Admit or transfer? The role of insurance in high-transfer-rate medical conditions in the emergency department

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We study the association of payer status with odds of transfer compared with admission from the emergency department (ED) for multiple diagnoses with a high percentage of transfers.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of adult ED encounters using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project 2010 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample. We used the Clinical Classification Software to identify disease categories with 5% or more encounters resulting in transfer (27 categories; 3.7 million encounters based on survey weights). We sorted encounters by condition into 12 groups according to expected medical or surgical specialist needs. We used logistic regression to assess the role of payer status on odds of transfer compared with admission and report adjusted odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Among high-transfer conditions in 2010, uninsured patients had double the odds of transfer compared with privately insured patients (OR 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72 to 2.62). Medicaid patients were also more likely to be transferred (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.38). Uninsured patients had higher odds of transfer in all specialist categories (significant in 9 of 12). The categories with the highest odds of transfer for the uninsured included nephrology (OR 2.44; 95% CI 1.07 to 5.55), psychiatry (OR 2.26; 95% CI 1.65 to 3.25), and hematology-oncology (OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.50 to 3.25); the highest for Medicaid were general surgery (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.83), hematology-oncology (OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.05 to 2.30), and vascular surgery (OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.02 to 2.28).

CONCLUSION

Insurance status appears to play a role in ED disposition (transfer versus admission) for many high-transfer conditions.

Emergency care and health systems: consensus-based recommendations and future research priorities

The theme of the 14th annual Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference was "Global Health and Emergency Care: A Research Agenda." The goal of the conference was to create a robust and measurable research agenda for evaluating emergency health care delivery systems. The concept of health systems includes the organizations, institutions, and resources whose primary purpose is to promote, restore, and/or maintain health. This article further conceptualizes the vertical and horizontal delivery of acute and emergency care in low-resource settings by defining specific terminology for emergency care platforms and discussing how they fit into broader health systems models. This was accomplished through discussion surrounding four principal questions touching upon the interplay between health systems and acute and emergency care. This research agenda is intended to assist countries that are in the early stages of integrating emergency services into their health systems and are looking for guidance to maximize their development and health systems planning efforts.

Open supracondylar femur fractures with bone loss in the polytraumatized patient - Timing is everything!

INTRODUCTION

Open supracondylar femur fractures are rare, complex injuries which occur in polytrauma patients and are complicated by bone loss, contamination, compromised soft tissues, and poor host condition. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate a successful treatment protocol for these challenging injuries.

METHODS

A consecutive series of 15 open supracondylar femur fractures in 14 polytrauma patients (ages 16-75, mean 41) were treated at one Level I trauma centre by a single surgeon. Fracture patterns included seven AO/OTA Type C2 and eight Type C3 fractures. All fractures were open and classified by Gustillo/Anderson as type IIIA (10 fractures) and type IIIB (five fractures). Stage I was performed within 24h and included thorough open fracture care and early definitive fixation with a laterally based locking device and antibiotic bead placement. Stage II was performed several months later (average 3.6 months) when the soft tissue envelope had revascularized and the polytrauma patient had recovered from their other injuries. Stage II consisted of either an anterior incision or subvastus approach to the distal femur, bone grafting, BMP application, and addition of medial column support to create rigid fixation.

RESULTS

All fractures (15/15) healed uneventfully. Union was determined by absence of pain and radiographic union in 3/4 cortices. Mean time to union was 4 months. There were no deep infections and alignment was maintained (average tibiofemoral angel of 5° of valgus) although several limbs were complicated by knee stiffness.

CONCLUSIONS

Healing of open supracondylar femur fractures with critical sized bone defects requires diligent surgical timing in order to optimise the host and wound bed. Thorough initial debridement and early definitive fixation halt ongoing soft tissue injury, restores length and alignment, and allow for sterilisation of the wound. After patients have recovered from their other injuries and the soft tissue sleeve has revascularized, bone grafting with BMP supplementation and medial column plating allows for rigid fixation of the femur and offers the biology these fracture patterns require for successful union without infection.

Global disease burden of conditions requiring emergency surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgical disease is inadequately addressed globally, and emergency conditions requiring surgery contribute substantially to the global disease burden.

METHODS

This was a review of studies that contributed to define the population-based health burden of emergency surgical conditions (excluding trauma and obstetrics) and the status of available capacity to address this burden. Further data were retrieved from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010 and the University of Washington's Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation online data.

RESULTS

In the index year of 2010, there were 896,000 deaths, 20 million years of life lost and 25 million disability-adjusted life-years from 11 emergency general surgical conditions reported individually in the Global Burden of Disease Study. The most common cause of death was complicated peptic ulcer disease, followed by aortic aneurysm, bowel obstruction, biliary disease, mesenteric ischaemia, peripheral vascular disease, abscess and soft tissue infections, and appendicitis. The mortality rate was higher in high-income countries (HICs) than in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (24.3 versus 10.6 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants respectively), primarily owing to a higher rate of vascular disease in HICs. However, because of the much larger population, 70 per cent of deaths occurred in LMICs. Deaths from vascular disease rose from 15 to 25 per cent of surgical emergency-related deaths in LMICs (from 1990 to 2010). Surgical capacity to address this burden is suboptimal in LMICs, with fewer than one operating theatre per 100,000 inhabitants in many LMICs, whereas some HICs have more than 14 per 100,000 inhabitants.

CONCLUSION

The global burden of surgical emergencies is described insufficiently. The bare estimates indicate a tremendous health burden. LMICs carry the majority of emergency conditions; in these countries the pattern of surgical disease is changing and capacity to deal with the problem is inadequate. The data presented in this study will be useful for both the surgical and public health communities to plan a more adequate response.

Development of road safety performance indicators for trauma management in Europe

Trauma management (TM) covers two types of medical treatment: the initial one provided by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and a further one provided by permanent medical facilities. There is a consensus in the professional literature that to reduce the severity and the number of road crash victims, the TM system should provide rapid and adequate initial care of injury, combined with sufficient further treatment at a hospital or trauma centre. Recognizing the important role of TM for reducing road crash injury outcome, it was decided, within the EU funded SafetyNet project, to develop road safety performance indicators (SPIs) which would characterize the level of TM systems' performance in European countries and enable country comparisons. The concept of TM SPIs was developed based on a literature study of performance indicators in TM, a survey of available practices in Europe and data availability examinations. A set of TM SPIs was introduced including 14 indicators which characterize five issues such as: availability of EMS stations; availability and composition of EMS medical staff; availability and composition of EMS transportation units; characteristics of the EMS response time, and availability of trauma beds in permanent medical facilities. Basic information on the TM systems was collected in close cooperation with the national expert group. A dataset with TM SPIs for 21 countries was created. It was demonstrated that the countries can be compared using selected TM SPIs. Moreover, a more general comparison of the TM systems' performance in the countries is possible, using multiple ranking and statistical weighting techniques. By both methods, final estimates were received enabling the recognition of groups of countries with similar levels of the TM system's performance. The results of various trials were consistent as to the recognition of countries with high or low level of the TM systems' performance, where in grouping countries with intermediate levels of the TM system's performance some differences were observed. The SafetyNet project's practice demonstrated that data collection for estimating TM SPIs is not an easy task but is realizable for the majority of countries. The TM SPIs' message is currently limited to the availability of trauma care services. Further development of the TM SPIs should focus on characteristics of actual treatment supplied, based on combined police and medical road crash related databases.