Clinical evaluation of the Trauma Outcome Profile (TOP) in the longer-term follow-up of polytrauma patients

Parameters influencing health-related quality of life after severe trauma: a systematic review (part II)

INTRODUCTION

It is increasingly recognized that health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is a relevant outcome to study in populations comprising severely injured patients. Although some studies have readily demonstrated a compromised HRQoL in those patients, evidence regarding factors that predict HRQoL is scarce. This hinders attempts to prepare patient-specific plans that may aid in revalidation and improved life satisfaction. In this review, we present identified predictors of HRQoL in patients that have suffered severe trauma.

METHODS

The search strategy included a database search until the 1st of January 2022 in the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science, and reference checking. Studies were eligible for inclusion when (HR)QoL was studied in patients with major, multiple, or severe injury and/or polytrauma, as defined by authors by means of an Injury Severity Score (ISS) cut-off value. The results will be discussed in a narrative manner.

RESULTS

A total of 1583 articles were reviewed. Of those, 90 were included and used for analysis. In total, 23 possible predictors were identified. The following parameters predicted reduced HRQoL in severely injured patients and came forward in at least more than three studies: higher age, female gender, lower extremity injuries, higher rate of injury severity, lower achieved educational level, presence of (pre-existing) comorbidities and mental illness, longer duration of hospital stay, and high level of disability.

CONCLUSION

Age, gender, injured body region, and severity of injury were found to be good predictors of health-related quality of life in severely injured patients. A patient-centered approach, based on individual, demographic, and disease-specific predictors, is highly recommended.

Utility of the Healthy Aging Brain Care Monitor as a Patient-Reported Symptom Monitoring Tool in Older Injury Survivors

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of the Healthy Aging Brain Care Monitor (HABC-M) as a patient-reported outcome tool to measure cognitive, functional, and psychological symptoms among older adults who sustained non-neurologic injuries requiring hospital admission.

METHODS

We used data from a multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the utility of the HABC-M Self-Report version in older patients recovering from traumatic injuries. A total of 143 patients without cognitive impairment were included in the analysis. Cronbach's alpha was used to measure the internal consistency, and Spearman's rank correlation test was used to evaluate the relationship of the HABC-M with standard measures of cognitive, functional, and psychological outcomes.

RESULTS

The HABC-M subscales and the total scale showed satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.64 to 0.77). The HABC-M cognitive subscale did not correlate with the Mini-Mental State Examination. The HABC-M functional and psychological subscales correlated with corresponding standard reference measures (|rs| = 0.24-0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

The HABC-M Self-Report version is a practical alternative to administering multiple surveys to monitor functional and psychological sequelae in older patients recovering from recent non-neurologic injuries. Its clinical application may facilitate personalized, multidisciplinary care coordination among older trauma survivors without cognitive impairment.

Digitalising patient reported outcome collection tools in orthopaedic trauma-A scoping review

AIMS

The aim of this study was to provide a scoping review to the role of digital technology in the collection of orthopaedic trauma related patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews and Arksey and O'Malley frameworks were followed. A search strategy identified relevant literature, with the identified criteria screened for acceptability for inclusion. Data was extracted to form a descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

Six studies met the criteria for inclusion. All were quantitative, the majority were published in the United States of America and the use of iPads was the commonest form of digital technology used. Heterogeneity existed in the type of outcomes collected between studies. All studies aimed to compare traditional methods of PROMs collection to digital methods, with an overall thematic summary suggestive of the positive impact of electronic methods of collecting patient reported outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This paper has demonstrated the dearth of ePROM implementation in the orthopaedic trauma setting, however its use has proved successful and therefore further evidence is needed to demonstrate its effectiveness. Furthermore, the types of PROMs in orthopaedic trauma varies significantly, and efforts to standardise the type of digital trauma PROMs used are recommended.

Completeness and Mismatch of Patient-Important Outcomes After Trauma

To assess the completeness of the collection of patient-important outcomes and the mismatch between outcomes measured in research and patients' important issues after trauma.

Summary Background Data

To date, severe trauma has mainly been assessed using in-hospital mortality. Yet, with 80 to 90% survivors discharged from hospital, it is critical to assess the collection of patient important long-term outcomes of trauma.

Methods

Mixed methods study combining a systematic review of outcomes and their comparison with domains elicited by patients during a qualitative study. We searched Medline, EMBASE and clinicaltrials.gov from January 1, 2014 to September 30, 2019 and extracted all outcomes from reports including severe trauma. We compared these outcomes with 97 domains that matter to trauma survivors identified in a previous qualitative study. We defined as patient-important outcome as the 10 most frequently elicited domains in the qualitative study. We assessed the number of domains captured in each report to illustrate the completeness of the collection of patient-important outcomes. We also assessed the mismatch between outcomes collected and what matters to patients.

Findings

Among the 116 reports included in the systematic review, we identified 403 outcomes collected with 154 unique measurements tools. Beside mortality, measurement tools most frequently used were the Glasgow Outcome Scale (31.0%, n=36), questions on patients' return to work (20,7%, n=24) and the EQ-5D (19.0%, n=22). The comparison between the outcomes identified in the systematic review and the domains from the qualitative study found that 10.3% (n=12) reports did not collect any patient-important domains and one collected all 10 patient-important domains. By examining each of the 10 patient-important domains, none was collected in more than 72% of reports and only five were among the ten most frequently measured domains in studies.

Conclusion

The completeness of the collection of the long-term patient-important outcomes after trauma can be improved. There was a mismatch between the domains used in the literature and those considered important by patients during a qualitative study.

Health-related quality of life after severe trauma and available PROMS: an updated review (part I)

Introduction

Throughout the years, a decreasing trend in mortality rate has been demonstrated in patients suffering severe trauma. This increases the relevance of documentation of other outcomes for this population, including patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The aim of this review was to summarize the results of the studies that have been conducted regarding HRQoL in severely injured patients (as defined by the articles’ authors). Also, we present the instruments that are used most frequently to assess HRQoL in patients suffering severe trauma.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science for articles published from inception until the 1st of January 2022. Reference lists of included articles were reviewed as well. Studies were considered eligible when a population of patients with major, multiple or severe injury and/or polytrauma was included, well-defined by means of an ISS-threshold, and the outcome of interest was described in terms of (HR)QoL. A narrative design was chosen for this review.

Results

The search strategy identified 1583 articles, which were reduced to 113 after application of the eligibility criteria. In total, nineteen instruments were used to assess HRQoL. The SF-36 was used most frequently, followed by the EQ-5D and SF-12. HRQoL in patients with severe trauma was often compared to normative population norms or pre-injury status, and was found to be reduced in both cases, regardless of the tool used to assess this outcome. Some studies demonstrated higher scoring of the patients over time, suggesting improved HRQoL after considerable time after severe trauma.

Conclusion

HRQoL in severely injured patients is overall reduced, regardless of the instrument used to assess it. The instruments that were used most frequently to assess HRQoL were the SF-36 and EQ-5D. Future research is needed to shed light on the consequences of the reduced HRQoL in this population. We recommend routine assessment and documentation of HRQoL in severely injured patients.

Frequency of relevant back pain two years after trauma and the effect on health-related quality of life

BACKGROUND

Persisting back pain is a frequent consequence after severe trauma including injury to the spine. Reports on the incidence and relevance of back pain in severely injured patients in the absence of direct injury to the spine are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the frequency of relevant back pain and its effect on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in trauma patients with spine injury compared to patients without direct impact to spine postdischarge and two years after trauma within an observational study.

METHODS

A two-year follow-up survey by using the Polytrauma Outcome Chart (PoloChart) and a set of specific questionnaires on socioeconomic and other HRQoL aspects was conducted among adult patients that had been treated for severe traumatic injuries (ISS ⩾ 9) at a German level 1 trauma center between 2008 and 2017. Patient subgroups included patients with relevant (VAS ⩾ 3) versus non-relevant back pain (VAS < 3) stratified by visual analogue scale (VAS 0-10). Patients with relevant back pain were separated into patients with (AIS spine ⩾ 1) and without spine injury (AIS spine = 0) according to the Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS).

RESULTS

543/1010 questionnaires were returned yielding a response rate of 54%. Patients were predominantly male (n= 383/543; 71%) with a mean age 45 ± 19 years, mostly blunt trauma (n= 524/543; 97%) and a mean ISS 18 ± 12 points. 32.4% of patients had sustained a spine injury defined by an AIS spine ⩾ 1 (n= 176/543). Half of these patients suffered from relevant back pain two years after trauma (n= 90/176; 51.1%); in contrast, in non-spine injured patients one in three patients reported relevant back pain (n= 127/367; 34.6%). Patients with relevant back pain reported significantly lower HRQoL as measured by the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and the Trauma Outcome Profile. The use of pain medication after discharge and at two years after trauma was significantly higher in patients with relevant back pain (n= 183/211; 86.7% vs. n= 214/318; 75.8%; p< 0.001; pain medication 2 years after trauma: n= 113/210, 53.8% vs. 68/317, 21.5%, p< 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Persisting back pain is frequent at two years after trauma independent of presence or absence of initial injury to the spine and associated with lower HRQoL in almost every dimension including physical, mental and social domains.

Measuring functional outcomes in major trauma: can we do better?

PURPOSE

There is relatively limited large scale, long-term unified evidence to describe how quality of life (QoL) and functional outcomes are affected after polytrauma. The aim of this study is to review validated measures available to assess QoL and functional outcomes and make recommendations on how best to assess patents after major trauma.

METHODS

PubMed and EMBASE databases were interrogated to identify suitable patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for use in major trauma, and current practice in their use globally.

RESULTS

Overall, 81 papers met the criteria for inclusion and evaluation. Data from these were synthesised. A full set of validated PROMs tools were identified for patients with polytrauma, as well as critique of current tools available, allowing us to evaluate practice and recommend specific outcome measures for patients following polytrauma, and system changes needed to embed this in routine practice moving forward.

CONCLUSION

To achieve optimal outcomes for patients with polytrauma, we will need to focus on what matters most to them, including their needs (and unmet needs). The use of appropriate PROMs allows evaluation and improvement in the care we can offer. Transformative effects have been noted in cases where they have been used to guide treatment, and if embedded as part of the wider system, it should lead to better overall outcomes. Accordingly, we have made recommendations to this effect. It is time to seize the day, bring these measures even further into our routine practice, and be part of shaping the future.

Assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma - instruments and methods: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

We (1) collected instruments that assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), activities of daily living (ADL) and social participation during follow-up after polytrauma, (2) described their use and (3) investigated other relevant patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessed in the studies.

DESIGN

Systematic Review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guideline.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, as well as the trials registers ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP were searched from January 2005 to April 2018.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All original empirical research published in English or German including PROs of patients aged 18-75 years with an Injury Severity Score≥16 and/or an Abbreviated Injury Scale≥3. Studies with defined injuries or diseases (e.g. low-energy injuries) and some text types (e.g. grey literature and books) were excluded. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were excluded, but references screened for appropriate studies.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction, narrative content analysis and a critical appraisal (e.g. UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) were performed by two reviewers independently.

RESULTS

The search yielded 3496 hits; 54 publications were included. Predominantly, HRQoL was assessed, with Short Form-36 Health Survey applied most frequently. ADL and (social) participation were rarely assessed. The methods most used were postal surveys and single assessments of PROs, with a follow-up period of one to one and a half years. Other relevant PRO areas reported were function, mental disorders and pain.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a large variation in the assessment of PROs after polytrauma, impairing comparability of outcomes. First efforts to standardise the collection of PROs have been initiated, but require further harmonisation between central players. Additional knowledge on rarely reported PRO areas (e.g. (social) participation, social networks) may lead to their consideration in health services provision.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017060825.

Main factors predicting somatic, psychological, and cognitive patient outcomes after significant injury: a pilot study of a simple prognostic tool

Background

There are still insufficient data on the complexity and predictability of patient-related outcomes following trauma. The aim of this study was to assess longer-term outcomes in patients with significant injury and to develop a simple scoring method to identify patients at high risk of subsequent deficits 1–2 years after injury.

Methods

We conducted a prospective cohort study of survivors of significant injury (New Injury Severity Score, NISS greater than or equal to 8), with analysis of patients’ 1- to 2-year health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and their functional outcomes based on Short Form-36 (SF-36), Trauma Outcome Profile (TOP), and Quality Of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI). Documented variables suspected or known from the literature to be possible factors associated with outcome were first analysed by univariate analysis, and significant variables were entered into a stepwise logistic regression analysis. Scores predicting longer-term impaired outcome were constructed from risk factors resulting from multivariate analysis.

Results

Depending on the patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) used, up to 30 per cent of 1052 study patients (mean NISS 18.6) indicated somatic, 27 per cent psychological, and 54 per cent cognitive deficits. The investigated sociodemographic, injury-related, treatment, and early hospital outcome variables demonstrated only low associations with longer-term outcome in univariate analysis that were highest for preinjury pain or function (R = 0.4) and outcome at hospital discharge (R = 0.3). After logistic regression, the study variables explained a maximum variance of 23 per cent for somatic, 11 per cent for psychological, and 14 per cent for cognitive longer-term outcomes. The resulting Aarau trauma prognostic longer-term outcome scoring (ATPLOS) system, developed by checking eight risk factors, had a specificity of up to 80 per cent, and importantly may facilitate early detection of patients at risk of a poorer longer-term outcome.

Conclusion

Despite the high rate of deficits recorded for survivors of significant injury, particularly in loss of cognitive function, the multiple variables analysed only led to a limited characterization of patient-related longer-term outcomes. Until more is known about additional individual influencing factors, the proposed scoring system may serve well for clinical evaluation.

Registration number

NCT 02165137 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)

Prospective observational study to examine health-related quality of life and develop models to predict long-term patient-reported outcomes 6 months after hospital discharge with blunt thoracic injuries

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the long-term outcomes and health-related quality of life in patients with blunt thoracic injuries over 6 months from hospital discharge and develop models to predict long-term patient-reported outcomes.

DESIGN

A prospective observational study using longitudinal survey design.

SETTING

The study recruitment was undertaken at 12 UK hospitals which represented diverse geographical locations and covered urban, suburban and rural areas across England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS

337 patients admitted to hospital with blunt thoracic injuries were recruited between June 2018-October 2020.

METHODS

Participants completed a bank of two quality of life surveys (Short Form-12 (SF-12) and EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Levels) and two pain questionnaires (Brief Pain Inventory and painDETECT Questionnaire) at four time points over the first 6 months after discharge from hospital. A total of 211 (63%) participants completed the outcomes data at 6 months after hospital discharge.

OUTCOMES MEASURES

Three outcomes were measured using pre-existing and validated patient-reported outcome measures. Outcomes included: Poor physical function (SF-12 Physical Component Score); chronic pain (Brief Pain Inventory Pain Severity Score); and neuropathic pain (painDETECT Questionnaire).

RESULTS

Despite a trend towards improving physical functional and pain at 6 months, outcomes did not return to participants perceived baseline level of function. At 6 months after hospital discharge, 37% (n=77) of participants reported poor physical function; 36.5% (n=77) reported a chronic pain state; and 22% (n=47) reported pain with a neuropathic component. Predictive models were developed for each outcome highlighting important data collection requirements for predicting long-term outcomes in this population. Model diagnostics including calibration and discrimination statistics suggested good model fit in this development cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified the recovery trajectories for patients with blunt thoracic injuries over the first 6 months after hospital discharge and present prognostic models for three important outcomes which after external validation could be used as clinical risk stratification scores.

Medically graded reduced capacity to work (RCW) following significant injury as explained by patient related outcome measures (PROMs) - A prospective trauma center evaluation

BACKGROUND

Data is limited how well patient-reported longer-term outcome measures (PROMs) explain medically graded reduced capacity for work (RCW).

OBJECTIVE

This prospective study investigates the association of RCW with several PROMs in addition to demographic and injury-related variables in significantly injured of working age.

METHODS

Patients (New Injury Severity Score, NISS ≥ 8) were recruited consecutively. RCW, as registered by the largest Swiss accident insurer, was tested against demographic, trauma and treatment characteristics, and patients' contemporaneous two year rating of functional outcome and quality of life following trauma with measures such as the Short-Form (SF)-36 or Trauma Outcome Profile (TOP), using uni- and multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

140 patients (mean 42 years, 2-year RCW rate 21%) participated in the longer-term follow-up of self-rated outcome. In multivariable analysis, all investigated baseline factors together accounted for 48% of the variance explaining 2-year postinjury RCW with 31% contributed by demographic, injury or treatment related variables, and 17% by patients' condition at hospital discharge. Patients' self-rated longer-term outcome provided 61% of the information on concurrent RCW, whereby 53% identified worsening of physical function (SF-36) and additional 8% constraints in daily activities (TOP). Four variables (Glasgow Outcome Scale at the time of hospital discharge and SF-36 physical functioning, TOP daily activities, SF-36 role physical at two years) explained 71% of RCW, corresponding to an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.95.

CONCLUSIONS

Objectively graded RCW 2 years after injury was found to be well explained by the combined information of patients' subjective longer-term outcome together with basic patient, trauma and treatment characteristics.

[Emergency room and major trauma treatment is a "loss-making business" : A Swiss trauma center experience with current DRG reimbursement]

Hintergrund

Es galt herauszufinden, wie kostendeckend die Versorgung potenziell Schwerverletzter in einem Schweizer Traumazentrum ist, und inwieweit Spitalgewinne bzw. -verluste mit patientenbezogenen Unfall‑, Behandlungs- oder Outcome-Daten korrelieren.

Methodik

Analyse aller 2018 im Schockraum (SR) bzw. mit Verletzungsschwere New Injury Severity Score (NISS) ≥8 notfallmäßig stationär behandelter Patienten eines Schwerverletztenzentrums der Schweiz (uni- und multivariate Analyse; p < 0,05).

Ergebnisse

Für das Studienkollektiv (n = 513; Ø NISS = 18) resultierte gemäß Spitalkostenträgerrechnung ein Defizit von 1,8 Mio. CHF. Bei einem Gesamtdeckungsgrad von 86 % waren 66 % aller Fälle defizitär (71 % der Allgemein- vs. 42 % der Zusatzversicherten; p < 0,001). Im Mittel betrug das Defizit 3493.- pro Patient (allg. Versicherte, Verlust 4545.-, Zusatzversicherte, Gewinn 1318.-; p < 0,001). Auch „in“- und „underlier“ waren in 63 % defizitär. SR-Fälle machten häufiger Verlust als Nicht-SR-Fälle (73 vs. 58 %; p = 0,002) wie auch Traumatologie- vs. Neurochirurgiefälle (72 vs. 55 %; p < 0,001). In der multivariaten Analyse ließen sich 43 % der Varianz erhaltener Erlöse mit den untersuchten Variablen erklären. Hingegen war der ermittelte Deckungsgrad nur zu 11 % (korr. R²) durch die Variablen SR, chirurgisches Fachgebiet, Intensivaufenthalt, Thoraxverletzungsstärke und Spitalletalität zu beschreiben. Case-Mix-Index gemäß aktuellen Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG) und Versicherungsklasse addierten weitere 13 % zu insgesamt 24 % erklärter Varianz.

Diskussion

Die notfallmäßige Versorgung potenziell Schwerverletzter an einem Schweizer Traumazentrum erweist sich nur in einem Drittel der Fälle als zumindest kostendeckend, dies v. a. bei Zusatzversicherten, Patienten mit einem hohen Case-Mix-Index oder einer IPS- bzw. kombinierten Polytrauma- und Schädel-Hirn-Trauma-DRG-Abrechnungsmöglichkeit.

Zusatzmaterial online

Die Online-Version dieses Beitrags (10.1007/s00113-020-00937-w) enthält weitere Tabellen und Abbildungen (s. Verweise „Zusatzmaterial online: Abb.“ bzw. „Zusatzmaterial online: Tab.“ im Text). Beitrag und Zusatzmaterial stehen Ihnen auf www.springermedizin.de zur Verfügung. Bitte geben Sie dort den Beitragstitel in die Suche ein, das Zusatzmaterial finden Sie beim Beitrag unter „Ergänzende Inhalte“.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Motorcycle Crash Victims One Year After Injury: A Longitudinal Study in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Despite the burden of injury associated with motorcycle crashes and injuries in Vietnam, there are no studies investigating health-related quality of life (HRQoL) following a nonfatal motorcycle crash in this country. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the change of HRQoL preinjury, and at 6 and 12 months postinjury motorcycle crash in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Outcome measures were Physical Component Scores (PCS) and Mental Component Scores (MCS) of the Short Form 12 Health Survey (SF-12) version 2 and the EQ-5D. Multilevel mixed models were undertaken. A total of 352 hospitalized motorcyclists were followed-up. Compared with preinjury, the SF-12 PCS reduced by 6.61 points (95% confidence interval [CI] = -8.21 to -5.03) and 5.12 points (95% CI = -6.74 to -3.51) at 12 months postinjury. MCS also reduced by 4.23 points (95% CI = -5.99 to -2.47) at 6 months but increased by 1.29 points (95% CI = -0.49 to 3.08) at 12 months postinjury. The EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale score decreased by 10.41 points (95% CI = -11.49 to -9.33) at 6 months and 6.48 points (95% CI = -7.58 to -5.38) at 12 months postinjury. The HRQoL among injured motorcycle riders improved between 6 and 12 months after injury but had not returned to the levels before injury.

Predicting Posttraumatic Growth among Firefighters: The Role of Deliberate Rumination and Problem-Focused Coping

Exposure to work-related traumatic incidents in firefighters may result in positive psychological changes which are termed “posttraumatic growth”. This study aimed to construct structure equation modeling based on the model of posttraumatic growth in firefighters. Methods: A total of 226 firefighters who had experienced a work-related traumatic incident participated. The participants from three municipal fire departments and seven fire stations completed an anonymous survey asking about extraversion, optimism, calling in the workplace, problem-focused coping, deliberate rumination, and posttraumatic growth. The model fit indices were suitable for the recommended level. Seven of the 11 paths established in the initial hypothetical model were identified. The variables of deliberate rumination, problem-focused coping, and extraversion had a significant effect on the posttraumatic growth of firefighters, with an explanatory power of 38.7%. The findings show that it is important to develop strategies to enhance deliberate rumination and problem-focused coping for firefighters after work-related traumatic events.

Physical injury, stress, and health: Protective role of dispositional optimism

Physical injuries are common occurrences that can have substantial implications for personal, emotional, and social functioning. A recent study reported higher prevalence of common illnesses and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQL) in injury victims. Based on these findings, the present study examined the role of the antibody immunoglobulin A (IgA) and the stress hormone cortisol in the association between injury and health. Additionally, the role of daily life stress and dispositional optimism in this association was examined. Thirty-seven victims of injury (e.g., fractures and burns) and 41 noninjured participants were assessed for cortisol and IgA levels and completed a battery of questionnaires assessing illness prevalence, HRQL, perceived stress, and optimism. Injured participants reported higher prevalence of illness and poorer HRQL compared with noninjured participants; however, changes in cortisol or IgA levels did not explain this increase in illness. Correlations between perceived stress and HRQL were stronger in injured participants compared with noninjured controls, indicating that injured individuals are more affected by stress. Dispositional optimism was lower in injured participants, and optimism buffered the negative effect of stress on HRQL. Accordingly, it is suggested that optimism played a protective role against the negative consequences of stress in injured individuals, thus improving HRQL.

Introduction of a novel questionnaire to assess the quality of postdischarge outpatient care and socioeconomic state after severe multiple injury

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Trauma registries provide knowledge about the pathophysiological events that follow severe injuries but only little is known about outpatient care and socioeconomic consequences at later stages in case of survival. We introduce a novel questionnaire to specifically assess the quality of postdischarge outpatient care and socioeconomic burden up to two years after severe multiple injury.

DESIGN

Observational Study.

SETTING

Postdischarge outpatient treatment and socioeconomic burden within two years after severe trauma.

POPULATION

Severely injured adult trauma patients (Injury Severity Score 9 and ICU admission).

METHODS

A new questionnaire was introduced in context of a two-year follow-up mail survey.

RESULTS

The response rate was 57% (150/264 patients; 73% male, mean 45 years, mean ISS 17/New ISS 22; 99% blunt trauma). Rehabilitation measures were conducted in 70% of patients while 87% underwent outpatient treatment after discharge from the acute care facility. Further in-hospital stays were observed in 63% of patients and 19% reported the need for ongoing permanent care. Pain medication was taken by 74% of patients after discharge while 32% were still on pain medication at two years. 35% had been on sick leave >1 year while 18% had entirely lost their job. Every second patient reported financial disadvantages.

CONCLUSIONS

The questionnaire yielded detailed information about the quality of outpatient care after discharge and confirmed the high socioeconomic burden among patients at two years after severe multiple injury.

CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT

Long- term impairments after severe trauma are described frequently. Evaluation of ambulant treatment is the first step to optimize long- term rehabilitation and re-integration.

Evidence supporting wound care end points relevant to clinical practice and patients' lives. Part 2. Literature survey

Patients with wounds bear significant clinical, personal, and economic burdens yet complete wound healing is the only United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recognized primary clinical trial end point. The overall goal of this project is to work with FDA to expand the list of acceptable primary end points, recognizing that new and innovative treatments, devices, and drugs may not have complete healing as the focus. Part 1 of the project surveyed 628 wound care experts who identified and content-validated 15 end points most relevant to clinical practice and benefitting patients' lives as primary outcomes in clinical trials. Part 2 is focused on critical appraisal of the evidence in the wound care literature supporting FDA criteria to qualify these 15 end points as primary end points in clinical trials. Further research involved systematic review of the literature regarding the most promising end points. Forty volunteer, interdisciplinary, wound healing experts in fields related to the end points compiled evidence from systematic MEDLINE searches and society databases supporting the FDA criteria of reliability, clinical construct validity, capacity to detect concurrent or longitudinal change, and responder analysis. The search revealed 485 references involving over 462,000 subjects supporting FDA-required parameters for all 15 end points More than 50 references supported FDA-required parameters qualifying the following outcomes for use in clinical trials supporting interventions for FDA clearance: Pain reduction, Physical function and ambulation, Infection reduction, Time to heal, and Percent wound area reduction in 4-8 weeks. Among these, only Time to heal is currently recognized by the FDA as a primary wound outcome in clinical trials. These results suggest that wound science is already serving patients and professionals by improving these content-validated outcomes that merit regulatory consideration.

One-year outcome following brain injury: a comparison of younger versus elderly major trauma patients

INTRODUCTION

The increasing number of older trauma patients has provoked a debate on the need for subsequent rehabilitative therapy for the elderly. Our findings revealed a lack of detailed data on this topic so we became interested in the effective differences in the longer-term outcomes for older and younger major trauma patients with TBI. As validation studies on the recently published specific Quality of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI) have only involved patients under the age of 68 years, we focused on testing this score in comparison to other outcome measures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective cohort study of the differences in 1-year functional or health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes, such as the Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS), the Quality of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI) score or the medical outcomes study Short Form-36 (SF-36) between younger (16-64 years) and elderly (> 65 years) adults following major trauma (New Injury Severity Score, NISS ≥ 8) with TBI (Abbreviated Injury Scale, AIS head > 0).

RESULTS

Out of 326 TBI patients with a mean NISS of 20.6 ± 9.4 34% (n = 110 (33.7%)) were aged 65 or older versus n = 216 (66.3%) who were younger. Comparison of 1-year outcomes revealed no differences between younger versus elderly patients with regard to functional or HRQoL scores (e.g. total QOLIBRI 77.4 ± 20.0 and 75.6 ± 18.1, resp.). Univariate analysis showed no correlation of the total QOLIBRI with age (Pearson r = - 0.09) or trauma severity (AIS) of the head (r = - 0.05). Multivariate analysis confirmed an association of age 80 or older (R² = 0.026, p = 0.029), but not of overall age (R² = 0.004, p = 0.218) with 1-year outcome scores on the total QOLIBRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the rising rehabilitation demands of the elderly these pilot findings call for the utilisation of specific outcome scores such as the QOLIBRI in this age group as well, at least up to an age of 80 years and independently of the severity of TBI sustained.

Patient-reported outcomes in trauma: a scoping study of published research

More people are surviving traumatic injury, but disability and reduced quality of life are frequent. Investigators are now focusing on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to better understand this problem. We performed a scoping study of the literature to explore trends in the study of PROs after injury. The volume of published literature on PROs after injury has consistently increased, but use of measurement tool and categorization of publications are inconsistent. Journal keyword patterns are inconsistent and likely limit the effective dissemination of important findings. In studies of hospitalized trauma patients, more than 100 unique measurement tools were used, and trauma-specific measures were used in fewer than 5% of studies. International investigators are more consistent than those in the USAin the use of validated, classic measurement tools such as the Short-Form 36 and the EuroQoL Five-Dimension tools. Uniform use of measurement tools would help improve the quality and comparability of research on PROs, and trauma-specific measures would enhance the study of long-term injury outcomes.

The long-term outcomes and health-related quality of life of patients following blunt thoracic injury: a narrative literature review

BACKGROUND

Major Trauma remains a leading cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Blunt Thoracic Injury (BTI) accounts for > 15% of United Kingdom (UK) trauma admissions and is consistently associated with respiratory related complications that include pneumonia and respiratory failure. Despite this, it is unclear in current clinical practice how BTI impacts on the recovering trauma patients after discharge from hospital. This study aimed to investigate the state of knowledge on the impact of BTI on the long-term outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

METHODS

Data were sourced from Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL and Science Direct using a pre-defined systematic search strategy. A subsequent hand search of key references was used to identify potentially missed studies. Abstracts were screened for eligibility and inclusion. Fifteen studies met the eligibility criteria and were critically appraised. Data were extracted, analysed and synthesised in categories and sub-categories following a narrative approach.

RESULTS

Three major themes were identified from the 15 studies included in this review: (i) physical impact of BTI, (ii) psychological impact of BTI and (iii) socio-economic impact of BTI. The bulk of the available data focused on the physical impact where further sub-themes included: (i) physical functioning, (ii) ongoing unresolved pain, (iii) reduced respiratory function, (iv) thoracic structural integrity. Although there was a substantial difference in the length and method of follow up, there remains a general trend towards physical symptoms improving over time, particularly over the first six months after injury. Despite this, where sequelae continued at six months it remained likely that these would also be present at two years after injury.

CONCLUSION

The literature review demonstrated that BTI is associated with substantial sequelae that impacts on all aspects of daily functioning. Despite this there remains a paucity of data relating to long term outcomes in the BTI population, especially relating to psychological and socio-economic impact. There is also little consensus on the measures, tools and time-frames used to measure outcomes and HRQoL in this population. The full impact of BTI on this population needs further exploration.

Physical injury, health, and well-being: Role of stress perception

OBJECTIVE

Physical injuries are common occurrences that can have substantial implications for mental health and well-being. Ample studies indicated that increased levels of perceived stress is associated with increased prevalence of general health problems, as well as reduced health-related quality of life. Thus, the goal of the present study was to examine the long-lasting association between bodily injuries and general health. In addition, the role of stress perception in moderating the association between injury and general health was assessed.

METHODS

Two-hundred and forty victims of past injury and 251 non-injured participants completed a self-report health inventory questionnaire assessing illness prevalence during the six-month period prior to the study. In addition, they completed the short-form Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS SF-36) questionnaire and the Perceived Stress Scale.

RESULTS

Victims of past injuries reported higher incidences of illness, mainly upper respiratory infections and fever, compared to non-injured participants. In addition, injured participants reported poorer perceived health status, including reduced general health, physical functioning, and health beliefs. Perceived stress levels were similar in injured and non-injured participants, however, correlations between perceived stress and self-reported medical outcomes were stronger in injured participants compared to non-injured controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Past physical injuries are associated with increased incidence of general health concerns and poorer health-related well-being. Moreover, injured individuals do not report increased stress perception; however, when stressed, injured individuals are more affected and health-related quality of life is reduced. Promoting well-being in individuals who have suffered a significant injury is, thus, a clinical necessity and a pressing social priority. This study highlights the role of stress perception in the association between physical injury and health, and may assist in providing better multi-disciplinary care for the injured.

Prospective evaluation of the Quality of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI) score: minor differences in patients with major versus no or mild traumatic brain injury at one-year follow up

Background

The Quality of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI) score was developed to assess disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after traumatic brain injury (TBI). So far, validation studies on the QOLIBRI were only conducted in cohorts with traumatic brain injury. This study investigated the longer-term residuals in severely injured patients, focusing specifically on the possible impact of major TBI.

Methods

In a prospective questionnaire investigation, 199 survivors with an injury severity score (ISS) > 15 participated in one-year follow-up. Patients who had sustained major TBI (abbreviated injury scale, AIS head > 2) were compared with patients who had no or only mild TBI (AIS head ≤ 2). Univariate analysis (ANOVA, Cohen’s kappa, Pearson’s r) and stepwise linear regression analysis (B with 95% CI, R, R²) were used.

Results

The total QOLIBRI revealed no differences in one-year outcomes between patients with versus without major TBI (75 and 76, resp.; p = 0.68). With regard to the cognitive subscore, the group with major TBI demonstrated significantly more limitations than the one with no or mild TBI (p < 0.05). The AIS head correlated significantly with the cognitive dimension of the QOLIBRI (r = − 0.16; p < 0.05), but not with the mental components of the SF-36 or the TOP. In multivariate analysis, the influence of the severity of head injury (AIS head) on total QOLIBRI was weaker than that of injured extremities (R² = 0.02; p < 0.05 vs. R² = 0.04; p = 0.001) and equal to the QOLIBRI cognitive subscore (R² = 0.03, p < 0.01 each).

Conclusions

Given the unexpected result of similar mean QOLIBRI total score values and only minor differences in cognitive deficits following major trauma independently of whether patients sustained major brain injury or not, further studies should investigate whether the QOLIBRI actually has the discriminative capacity to detect specific residuals of major TBI. In effect, the score appears to indicate mental deficits following different types of severe trauma, which should be evaluated in more detail.

Trial registration

NCT02165137; retrospectively registered 11 June 2014.

Longer-term quality of life following major trauma: age only significantly affects outcome after the age of 80 years

Aim

Against the background of conflicting data on the topic, this study aimed to determine the differences in longer-term patient outcomes following major trauma with regard to age.

Materials and methods

A prospective trauma center survey of survivors of trauma (≥16 years) was carried out employing a New Injury Severity Score (NISS) ≥8 to investigate the influence of age on working capacity and several outcome scores, such as the trauma medical outcomes study Short Form-36 (physical component [PCS] and mental component [MCS]), the Euro Quality of Life (EuroQoL), or the Trauma Outcome Profile (TOP) at least 1 year following injury. Chi square tests, t-tests, and Pearson correlations were used as univariate; stepwise regression as multivariate analysis. Significance was set at p<0.05.

Results

In all, 718 major trauma patients (53.4±19.4 years; NISS 18.4±9.2) participated in the study. Multivariate analysis showed only low associations of patient or trauma characteristics with longer-term outcome scores, highest for the Injury Severity Score of the extremities with the PCS (R²=0.08) or the working capacity of employed patients (n=383; R²=0.04). For age, overall associations were even lower (best with the PCS, R²=0.04) or could not be revealed at all (TOP or MCS). Subgroup analysis with regard to decennia revealed the age effect to be mainly attributable to patients aged ≥80, who presented with a significantly worse outcome compared to younger people in all overall and physical component scores (p<0.001). In patients under 80 years an association of age was only found for EuroQoL (R²=0.01) and the PCS (R²=0.03).

Conclusion

Given the small impact of age on the longer-term outcomes of major trauma patients, at least up to the age of 80 years, resuscitation as well as rehabilitation strategies should be adapted accordingly.

[Long-term outcome following multiple trauma in working age : A prospective study in a Swiss trauma center]

BACKGROUND

Given the lack of data in the available literature, we were interested in the disability rate and corresponding insurance costs following multiple trauma in Switzerland. The possible impact of demographic, traumatic and hospital process factors as well as subjective and objective longer-term outcome variables on insurance data acquired were examined.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Following multiple trauma the clinical and socioeconomic parameters in 145 survivors of working age were investigated over 2 and 4 years post-injury at a Swiss trauma center (University Hospital Basel). The correlation with the corresponding data provided by the largest Swiss accident insurance company (Suva, n = 63) was tested by univariate and multivariate analysis and patients insured at Suva were compared with those insured elsewhere (n = 82).

RESULTS

The mean level of disability in this cohort of multiple trauma patients insured at Suva was 43 %. The insurer expected costs of more than 1 million Swiss Francs per multiply injured patient. In univariate analysis, only discrete correlations (maximum r = 0.37) were found with resulting disability, but significant correlations were found in subsequent multivariate testing most of all for age and the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA 11 % and 15 % predictive capacity, p = 0.001; corrected R² = 0.26). Among variables of longer-term outcome the Euro Quality of Life Group health-related quality of life in five dimensions (EQ-5D) correlated almost as highly with the objective extent of disability as did the reduced capacity to work declared by the patients (0.64 and 0.7, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The estimation of long-term disability following multiple trauma based on primary data following injury appears to be possible only to a limited extent. Given the clinical and socioeconomic relevance, comparable analyses are necessary by including all insurance providers involved.

The effect of socio-economic status on non-fatal outcome after injury: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Over the past decades, the number of survivors of injuries has rapidly grown. It has become important to focus more on the determinants of non-fatal outcome. Although socio-economic status (SES) is considered to be a fundamental determinant of health in general, the role of SES as a determinant of non-fatal outcome after injury is largely unknown.

METHODS

An online search was conducted in November 2015 using Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cinahl, Cochrane, Google scholar and PubMed. Studies examining the relation between SES and a physical or psychological outcome measure, or using SES as a confounder in a general trauma population were included. There were no restrictions regarding study design. The 'Quality in Prognostic Studies tool' was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies.

RESULTS

The 24 included studies showed large variations in methodological quality. The number of participants ranged from 56 to 4639, and assessments of the measures ranged from immediately to 6year post-injury. Studies used a large number of variables as indicators of SES. Participant's educational level was used most frequently. The majority of the studies used a multivariable technique to analyse the relation between SES and non-fatal outcome after injury. All studies found a positive association (80% of studies significant, n=19) between increased SES and better non-fatal outcome after injury.

CONCLUSION

Although an adequate and valid measure of SES is lacking, the results of this review showed that SES is an important determinant of non-fatal outcome after injury. Future research should focus on the definition and measurement of SES and should further underpin the effect of SES on non-fatal outcome after injury.

Effects of an Integrated 'Fast Track' Rehabilitation Service for Multi-Trauma Patients: A Non-Randomized Clinical Trial in the Netherlands

Objectives

The effects on health related outcomes of a newly-developed rehabilitation program, called ‘supported Fast Track multi-trauma rehabilitation service’ (Fast Track), were evaluated in comparison with conventional trauma rehabilitation service (Care as Usual).

Methods

Prospective, multi-center, non-randomized controlled study. Between 2009 and 2012, 132 adult multi-trauma patients were included: 65 Fast Track and 67 Care as Usual patients with an Injury Severity Score ≥16, complex multiple injuries in several extremities or complex pelvic and/or acetabulum fractures. The Fast Track program involved: integrated coordination between trauma surgeon and rehabilitation physician, shorter stay in hospital with faster transfer to a specialized trauma rehabilitation unit, earlier start of multidisciplinary treatment and ‘non-weight bearing’ mobilization. Primary outcomes were functional status (FIM) and quality of life (SF-36) measured through questionnaires at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months post-trauma. Outcomes were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects regression model.

Results

The FIM scores significantly increased between 0 and 3 months (p<0.001) for both groups showing that they had improved overall, and continued to improve between 3 and 6 months for Fast Track (p = 0.04) and between 3 and 9 months for Care as Usual (p = 0.03). SF-36 scores significantly improved in both groups between 3 and 6 months (Fast Track, p<0.001; Care as Usual, p = 0.01). At 12 months, SF-36 scores were still below (self-reported) baseline measurements of patient health prior to the accident. However, the FIM and SF-36 scores differed little between the groups at any of the measured time points.

Conclusion

Both Fast Track and Care as Usual rehabilitation programs were effective in that multi-trauma patients improved their functional status and quality of life. A faster (maximum) recovery in functional status was observed for Fast Track at 6 months compared to 9 months for Care as Usual. At twelve months follow-up no differential effects between treatment conditions were found.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN68246661

Lower Health-Related Quality of Life in Polytrauma Patients: Long-Term Follow-Up After Over 5 Years

Although trauma-associated mortality has fallen in recent decades, and medical care has continued to improve in many fields, the quality of life after experiencing polytrauma has attracted little attention in the literature. This group of patients suffer from persisting physical disabilities. Moreover, they experience long-term social, emotional, and psychological effects that limit/lower considerably their quality of life.We analyzed retrospective data on 147 polytraumatized patients by administering written questionnaires and conducting face-to-face interviews 6 ± 0.8 years after the trauma in consideration of the following validated scores: Glasgow Outcome Scale, European Quality of Life Score, Short Form-36, Trauma Outcome Profile, and Beck Depressions Inventory II.Our analysis of these results reveals that polytraumatized patients suffer from persistent pain and functional disabilities after >5 years. We also observed changes in their socioeconomic situation, as well as psychological after-effects.The rehabilitation of this particular group of patients should not only address their physical disabilities. The psychological after-effects of trauma must be acknowledged and addressed for an even longer period of time.

Health status and return to work in trauma patients at 3 and 6 months post-discharge: an Australian major trauma centre study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to describe post-discharge outcomes, and determine predictors of 3 and 6 months health status outcomes in a population of trauma patients at an inner city major trauma centre.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study of adult trauma patients admitted to this hospital with 3 and 6 months post-discharge outcomes assessment. Outcome measures were the Physical Component Scores (PCS) and Mental Component Scores (MCS) of the Short Form 12, EQ-5D, and return to work (in any capacity) if working prior to injury. Repeated measures mixed models and generalised estimating equation models were used to determine predictors of outcomes at 3 and 6 months.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-nine patients were followed up. Patients with lower limb injuries reported lower mean PCS scores between 3 and 6 months (coefficient -4.21, 95 % CI -7.58, -0.85) than those without lower limb injuries. Patients involved in pedestrian incidents or assaults and those with pre-existing mental health diagnoses reported lower mean MCS scores. In adjusted models upper limb injuries were associated with reduced odds of return to work at 3 and 6 months (OR 0.20, 95 % CI 0.07, 0.57) compared to those without upper limb injuries.

DISCUSSION

Predictors of poorer physical health status were lower limb injuries and predictors of mental health were related to the mechanism of injury and past mental health. Increasing injury severity score and upper limb injuries were the only predictors of reduced return to work. The results provide insights into the feasibility of routine post-discharge follow-up at a trauma service level.

The quest for a universal definition of polytrauma: a trauma registry-based validation study

BACKGROUND

A pilot validation recommended defining polytrauma as patients with an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score greater than 2 in at least two Injury Severity Score (ISS) body regions (2 × AIS score > 2). This study aimed to validate this definition on larger data set. We hypothesized that patients defined by the 2 × AIS score > 2 cutoff have worse outcomes and use more resources than those without 2 × AIS score > 2 and that this would therefore be a better definition of polytrauma.

METHODS

Patients injured between 2009 and 2011, with complete documentation of AIS by New South Wales Trauma Registry and 16 years and older were selected. Age and sex were obtained in addition to outcomes of ISS, hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, ICU LOS, and mortality. We compared demographic characteristics and outcomes between patients with ISS greater than 15 who did and did not meet the 2 × AIS score > 2 definition. We then undertook regression analyses (logistic regression for binary outcomes [ICU admission and death] and linear regression for hospital and ICU LOS) to compare outcomes for patients with and without 2 × AIS score > 2, adjusting for sex and age categories.

RESULTS

In the adjusted analyses, patients with 2 × AIS score > 2 had twice the odds of being admitted to the ICU compared with those without 2 × AIS score > 2 (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-2.8) and 1.7 times the odds of dying (95% CI, 1.4-2.0; p < 0.001 for both models). Patients with 2 × AIS score > 2 also had a mean difference of 1.5 days longer stay in the hospital compared with those without 2 × AIS score > 2 (95% CI, 1.4-1.7) and 1.6 days longer ICU stay (95% CI, 1.4-1.8; p < 0.001 for all models).

CONCLUSION

Patients with 2 × AIS score > 2 had higher mortality, more frequent ICU admissions, and longer hospital and ICU stay than those without 2 × AIS score > 2 and represents a superior definition to the definitions for polytrauma currently in use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic test/ criteria, level III.

Quality of life two years after severe trauma: a single-centre evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Trauma related injuries are a main cause for long-lasting morbidity and disability especially in younger patients with their productive years ahead. On a routine basis, we assessed health related quality of life two years after trauma of severely injured patients at our level-I trauma centre via posted survey.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The posted survey included (1) POLO-Chart questionnaire with European Quality of Life (EuroQoL), Short Form Health Survey-36 (SF 36) and the recently developed and validated Trauma Outcome Profile (TOP) combined with (2) single centre data according to TraumaRegister DGU(®) data sets including trauma mechanism, injuries and initial treatment. Inclusion criteria were severely injured patients ≥ 18 years, treated between 2008 and 2010. Exclusion criteria were death, cognitive impairment, lack of German language and denial of participation.

RESULTS

129 datasets were eligible for analysis reflecting a typical trauma collective with mean age 44 years, predominantly male (67%), mean ISS 22 and 98% blunt trauma. Two years after trauma, 62% of the patients reported of relevant remaining pain and 64% of severe functional deficit in at least one body region. Sixty-four percent of the patients suffered from decreased overall quality of life (EuroQoL≤0.8). Additionally, all domains of SF-36 were impaired compared to an age and gender adjusted cohort of healthy individuals, especially domains of pain and activity of daily living. These impairments were associated with decreased 'social functioning' and 'emotional role functioning'. TOP results confirmed these findings: Quality of life was decreased in almost every dimension. TOP additionally identified sequels especially in domains of "Mental Functioning" and impairments in psychological recovery including post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety. Socioeconomic impairments were frequent including further hospitalisations (62%), duration of inability to work ≥ 6 month (54%), financial disadvantages (45%) and work loss (26%).

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that multiple trauma patients two years after injury suffer from impairments including persisting pain, functional deficits, mental and socioeconomic deficits. The 'Trauma Outcome Profile' instrument seems a proper tool to discover impairments in trauma patients early on and guide proper rehabilitation resources to the best of the patient.

Health outcome after major trauma: what are we measuring?

Importance

Trauma is a global disease and is among the leading causes of disability in the world. The importance of outcome beyond trauma survival has been recognised over the last decade. Despite this there is no internationally agreed approach for assessment of health outcome and rehabilitation of trauma patients.

Objective

To systematically examine to what extent outcomes measures evaluate health outcomes in patients with major trauma.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL (from 2006–2012) were searched for studies evaluating health outcome after traumatic injuries.

Study selection and data extraction

Studies of adult patients with injuries involving at least two body areas or organ systems were included. Information on study design, outcome measures used, sample size and outcomes were extracted. The World Health Organisation International Classification of Function, Disability and Health (ICF) were used to evaluate to what extent outcome measures captured health impacts.

Results

34 studies from 755 studies were included in the review. 38 outcome measures were identified. 21 outcome measures were used only once and only five were used in three or more studies. Only 6% of all possible health impacts were captured. Concepts related to activity and participation were the most represented but still only captured 12% of all possible concepts in this domain. Measures performed very poorly in capturing concepts related to body function (5%), functional activities (11%) and environmental factors (2%).

Conclusion

Outcome measures used in major trauma capture only a small proportion of health impacts. There is no inclusive classification for measuring disability or health outcome following trauma. The ICF may provide a useful framework for the development of a comprehensive health outcome measure for trauma care.

[Long-term results after multiple trauma with ISS ≥ 25. Outcome and predictors of quality of life]

BACKGROUND

The survival chances of multiple trauma patients have continually improved over the last decades; therefore, it is often not a question of whether a patient survives a severe accident but rather how the patient survives.

METHODS

In a retrospective study 127 patients were questioned regarding quality of life and health and possible influencing factors using the POLO chart an average of 70 months after suffering severe trauma (ISS Ø 35.6).

RESULTS

The quality of life of severely injured patients is significantly reduced compared with the normal population even years after the trauma. In addition to four pretraumatic factors (older age, female gender, low education and previous illnesses) four posttraumatic variables (difficulties with authorities/institutions and unemployment as a consequence of the accident, long duration and subjectively inadequate treatment in hospital) were identified that have a negative impact on long-term quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

The self-reported quality of life after multiple trauma no longer permanently achieves the original level despite extensive rehabilitation measures. Post-traumatic factors have a greater impact on the long-term quality of life than the injury severity. A long-term care and specialized rehabilitation services are needed to improve outcome further.

Update on the definition of polytrauma

PURPOSE

The definition and use of the term "polytrauma" is inconsistent and lacks validation. This article describes the historical evolution of the term and geographical differences in its meaning, examines the challenges faced in defining it adequately in the current context, and summarizes where the international consensus process is heading, in order to provide the trauma community with a validated and universally agreed upon definition of polytrauma.

CONCLUSION

A lack of consensus in the definition of "polytrauma" was apparent. According to the international consensus opinion, both anatomical and physiological parameters should be included in the definition of polytrauma. An Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) based anatomical definition is the most practical and feasible given the ubiquitous use of the system. Convincing preliminary data show that two body regions with AIS >2 is a good marker of polytrauma-better than other ISS cutoffs, which could also indicate monotrauma. The selection of the most accurate physiological parameters is still underway, but they will most likely be descriptors of tissue hypoxia and coagulopathy.