Train surfing and other high voltage trauma: differences in injury-related mechanisms and operative outcomes after fasciotomy, amputation and soft-tissue coverage

Electrical Burn and Associated Factors That Prolong In-patient Stay in a Level Three Burn Unit

Electrical trauma is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, which have been reduced by improved medical care, as measured by the length of stay (LOS) as a marker for this population's quality of care. This paper will review the clinical and demographic characteristics, LOS in the hospital, and variables related to patients with electrical burns. A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a specialized burn unit in Southwest Colombia. Five hundred seventy-five electrical burn-related admissions from 2000 to 2016 were reviewed for the LOS and variables including patient-related (age, gender, marital status, education, and occupation), location of the accident (domestic vs labor-related), voltage, direct contact, arc, flash, flame, clinical presentation (burn surface area, depth, single or multiple organ injury, secondary infection, and abnormal labs), and treatment (surgical procedures and intensive care unit [ICU] admission). Univariate and bivariate analysis, with its 95% CI (confidence interval). We also performed a multiple logistic regression. LOS was correlated to males, age greater than 20 years, construction workers, high voltage injuries, severe burns by area and depth, infection, ICU admission, and multiple surgical procedures or extremity amputation. LOS due to electrical injury was observed to be significantly associated with the following variables, carpal tunnel release (OR [odds ratio]= 4.25, 95% CI [confidence interval] 1.70-5.20); amputation (OR = 2.81, 95% CI 1.60-5.10); infection (OR = 2.60, 95% CI 1.30-5.20); site of infection, mainly wound (OR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.10-1.44); associated injury (OR = 1.72, 95% CI 1.00-3.24); work or domestic accident (OR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.00-3.32); aged 20-40 years (OR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.00-2.10); CPK (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.00-2.00); and third-degree burns (OR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.00-2.80). Risk factors for LOS secondary to electrical injury should be appropriately addressed. Prevention at high-risk workplaces is imperative. Mitigating the injury with appropriate management of infection and timely surgical interventions play an essential role in the successful treatment of these patients.

Pediatric Train Injuries: A 10-Year Review From the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study Database

OBJECTIVES

Trains can cause severe injuries in pediatric patients requiring significant resource utilization. We sought to review train injuries in Pennsylvania to determine the burden of these injuries on the pediatric trauma system.

METHODS

We queried the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study Database to identify patients younger than 18 years injured by trains between 2007 and 2016. Demographics, hospital course, outcomes, and resource utilization were reviewed.

RESULTS

Thirty-five children from 17 Pennsylvania counties were included. Three counties accounted for 48.6% of injured children. The median age was 15.0 years, and most patients were White (60.0%) and male (77.1%). The median length of stay was 8.0 days and overall mortality 8.6%. Intensive care unit admission was required for 65.7%. The median Injury Severity and Functional Status at Discharge scores were 14.0 and 18.0, respectively. Major orthopedic injuries (fracture or amputation) were the most common (57.1%) followed by traumatic brain injury (45.7%), pneumothorax (14.3%), and solid organ injury (14.3%). Operative management was common with 65.7% undergoing surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Injuries caused by trains can be severe and are most commonly orthopedic or traumatic brain injuries. Targeted safety interventions may be possible given the common mechanisms and geographic clustering of these injuries.

High voltage injuries by contact with overhead lines: case reports of two young girls

High voltage burn injuries are rare in the pediatric age group, but can lead to devastating, severe sequelae. We present the cases of two young girls who suffered high voltage burn injuries due to direct contact with overhead power lines. Both patients came from difficult psychosocial backgrounds. The injuries resulted in severe long-term consequences and functional deficits.

Review of Adult Electrical Burn Injury Outcomes Worldwide: An Analysis of Low-Voltage vs High-Voltage Electrical Injury

The aims of this article are to review low-voltage vs high-voltage electrical burn complications in adults and to identify novel areas that are not recognized to improve outcomes. An extensive literature search on electrical burn injuries was performed using OVID MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE databases from 1946 to 2015. Studies relating to outcomes of electrical injury in the adult population (≥18 years of age) were included in the study. Forty-one single-institution publications with a total of 5485 electrical injury patients were identified and included in the present study. Fourty-four percent of these patients were low-voltage injuries (LVIs), 38.3% high-voltage injuries (HVIs), and 43.7% with voltage not otherwise specified. Forty-four percentage of studies did not characterize outcomes according to LHIs vs HVIs. Reported outcomes include surgical, medical, posttraumatic, and others (long-term/psychological/rehabilitative), all of which report greater incidence rates in HVI than in LVI. Only two studies report on psychological outcomes such as posttraumatic stress disorder. Mortality rates from electrical injuries are 2.6% in LVI, 5.2% in HVI, and 3.7% in not otherwise specified. Coroner's reports revealed a ratio of 2.4:1 for deaths caused by LVI compared with HVI. HVIs lead to greater morbidity and mortality than LVIs. However, the results of the coroner's reports suggest that immediate mortality from LVI may be underestimated. Furthermore, on the basis of this analysis, we conclude that the majority of studies report electrical injury outcomes; however, the majority of them do not analyze complications by low vs high voltage and often lack long-term psychological and rehabilitation outcomes after electrical injury indicating that a variety of central aspects are not being evaluated or assessed.