Outcomes of rural trauma patients who undergo damage control laparotomy

Surgical stabilization of critical abdominal injuries in a mature rural trauma system: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Worse outcomes following injuries are more likely in rural versus urban areas. In 2001, our state established an inclusive trauma system to improve mortality. In 2015, the trauma system had a consultation visit from the American College of Surgeons' Committee on Trauma, who made several recommendations. We hypothesized that continued maturation of this system would lead to more laparotomies prior to transfer to a higher level of care and better outcomes.

METHODS

Our trauma registry was queried to identify all patients transferred between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2020, who underwent laparotomy either before transfer or within 4 hours of arrival. The preconsultation (2010-2015) and postconsultation periods (2016-2020) were compared. Categorical and continuous variables were compared using χ2 and Mann-Whitney U tests, respectively.

RESULTS

We included 213 patients; 63 had laparotomy before transfer and 150 within 4 hours after transfer. Age, injury severity scores, systolic blood pressure, and mechanism of injury were not different between periods. Proportions of laparotomy before and after transfer and outcomes (mortality, hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay, ventilator days) were also similar (p = 0.368 for laparotomy, p = 0.840, 0.124, 0.286, 0.822 for outcomes). Compared with the preconsultation period, the proportion of laparotomy performed before transfer for severe injuries (abdominal Abbreviated Injury Scale score >3) significantly increased postconsultation (57.1% vs. 30.6%, p = 0.011). Incidence of damage-control laparotomies (43.9% vs. 23.6%; p = 0.020) and transfusion of plasma and platelets (33.6% vs. 13.2%; p < 0.001, 22.4% vs. 8.5%, p = 0.007, respectively) significantly increased.

CONCLUSION

Identification and surgical stabilization of critical patients at the non-Level I facilities prior to transfer, as well as blood product use and damage-control techniques, improved postconsultation, suggesting a shift in the approaches to surgical stabilization and resuscitation efforts in our trauma system.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Predictors of transfer from a remote trauma facility to an urban level I trauma center for blunt splenic injuries: a retrospective observational multicenter study

Background

The decision-making for admission versus emergent transfer of patients with blunt splenic injuries presenting to remote trauma centers with limited resources remains a challenge. Although splenectomy is standard for hemodynamically unstable patients, the specific criterion for non-operative management continues to be debated. Often, lower-level trauma centers do not have interventional radiology capabilities for splenic artery embolization, leading to transfer to a higher level of a care. Thus, the aim of this study was to identify specific characteristics of patients with blunt splenic injuries used for admittance or transfer at a remote trauma center.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was performed to examine the management of splenic injuries at a mountainous and remote Level III trauma center. Trauma patients ≥ 18 years who had a blunt splenic injury and initially received care at a Level III trauma center prior to admittance or transfer were included. Data were collected over 4.5 years (January 1, 2016 – June 1, 2020). Patients who were transferred out in > 24 h were excluded. Patient demographics, injury severity, spleen radiology findings, and clinical characteristics were compared by decision to admit or transfer to a higher level of care ≤ 24 h of injury. Results were analyzed using chi-square, Fisher’s exact, or Wilcoxon tests. Multivariable logistic models were used to identify predictors of transfer.

Results

Of the 73 patients included with a blunt splenic injury, 48% were admitted and 52% were transferred to a Level I facility. Most patients were male (n = 58), were a median age of 26 (21–42) years old, most (n = 62) had no comorbidities, and 47 had been injured from a ski/snowboarding accident. Compared to admitted patients, transferred patients were significantly more likely to be female (13/38 vs. 3/36, p = 0.007), to have an abbreviated injury scale score ≥ 3 of the chest (31/38 vs. 7/35, p = 0.002), have a higher injury severity score (16 (16–22) vs. 13 (9–16), p = 0.008), and a splenic injury grade ≥ 3 (32/38 vs. 12/35, p < 0.001). After adjustment, splenic injury grade ≥ 3 was the only predictor of transfer (OR: 12.1, 95% CI: 3.9–37.3, p < 0.001). Of the 32 transfers with grades 3–5, 16 were observed, and 16 had an intervention. Compared to patients who were observed after transfer, significantly more who received an intervention had a blush on CT (1/16 vs. 7/16, p = 0.02) and a higher median spleen grade of 4 (3–5) vs. 3 (3–3.5), p = 0.01).

Conclusions

Our data suggest that most patients transferred from a remote facility had a splenic injury grade ≥ 3, with concomitant injuries but were hemodynamically stable and were successfully managed non-operatively. Stratifying by spleen grade may assist remote trauma centers with refining transfer criteria for solid organ injuries.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13037-022-00339-4.

Emergency general surgery: impact of distance and rurality on mortality

BACKGROUND

There is debate about whether the distance from hospital, or rurality, impacts outcomes in patients admitted under emergency general surgery (EGS). The aim of this study was to determine whether distance from hospital, or rurality, affects the mortality of emergency surgical patients admitted in Scotland.

METHODS

This was a retrospective population-level cohort study, including all EGS patients in Scotland aged 16 years or older admitted between 1998 and 2018. A multiple logistic regression model was created with inpatient mortality as the dependent variable, and distance from hospital (in quartiles) as the independent variable of interest, adjusting for age, sex, co-morbidity, deprivation, admission origin, diagnosis category, operative category, and year of admission. A second multiple logistic regression model was created with a six-fold Scottish Urban Rural Classification (SURC) as the independent variable of interest. Subgroup analyses evaluated patients who required operations, emergency laparotomy, and inter-hospital transfer.

RESULTS

Data included 1 572 196 EGS admissions. Those living in the farthest distance quartile from hospital had lower odds of mortality than those in the closest quartile (OR 0.829, 95 per cent c.i. 0.798 to 0.861). Patients from the most rural areas (SURC 6) had higher odds of survival than those from the most urban (SURC 1) areas (OR 0.800, 95 per cent c.i. 0.755 to 0.848). Subgroup analysis showed that these effects were not observed for patients who required emergency laparotomy or transfer.

CONCLUSION

EGS patients who live some distance from a hospital, or in rural areas, have lower odds of mortality, after adjusting for multiple covariates. Rural and distant patients undergoing emergency laparotomy have no survival advantage, and transferred patients have higher mortality.

Dealing with the Sick Rural Surgery Patient in Need of Transfer

Care for rural and urban surgical patients is increasingly more complex due to advancing knowledge and technology. Interhospital transfers occur in approximately 10% of index encounters at rural hospitals secondary to mismatch of patient needs and local resources. Due to the recent expansion of air transport to rural areas, distance and geography are less of a barrier. The interhospital transfer process is understudied and far from standardized. Interhospital transfer status is associated with increase in mortality, complications, length of stay, and costs. The cost, price to patients, and safety of air ambulance transports cannot be ignored.