Effectiveness of a pediatric trauma team protocol

Accuracy of the American College of Surgeons Minimum Criteria for Full Trauma Team Activation for Children

OBJECTIVE

Pediatric trauma centers use reports from emergency medical service providers to determine if a trauma team should be sent to the emergency department to prepare to care for the patient. Little scientific evidence supports the current American College of Surgeons (ACS) indicators for trauma team activation. The objective of this study was to determine the accuracy of the ACS Minimum Criteria for Full Trauma Team Activation for children as well as the accuracy of the modified criteria used at the local sites for trauma activation.

METHODS

Emergency medical service providers who transported an injured child aged 15 years or younger to a pediatric trauma center in 1 of 3 cities were interviewed after emergency department arrival. Emergency medical service providers were asked if each of the activation indicators were present based on their evaluation. The need for full trauma team activation was determined through a medical record review using a published criterion standard definition. Undertriage and overtriage rates and positive likelihood ratios (+LRs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Emergency medical service provider interviews were conducted and outcome data were obtained for 9483 children. There were 202 (2.1%) cases that met the criterion standard for need for trauma team activation. Based on the ACS Minimum Criteria, 299 (3.0%) cases should have received a trauma activation. The ACS Minimum Criteria undertriaged 44.1% and overtriaged 20% (+LR, 27.9; 95% confidence interval, 23.1-33.7). Based on the actual activation status using the local criteria, 238 cases received a full trauma activation, 45% were undertriaged, and 1.4% were overtriaged (+LR, 40.1; 95% confidence interval, 32.4-49.7). There was 97% agreement between the ACS Minimum Criteria and the actual local activation status at the receiving institution.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACS Minimum Criteria for Full Trauma Team Activation for children have a high rate of undertriage. Changes that individual institutions have made to improve the accuracy of activations at their institutions seem to have had a limited effect on decreasing undertriage.

Pediatric trauma triage: A Pediatric Trauma Society Research Committee systematic review

BACKGROUND

Significant variability exists in the triage of injured children with most systems using mechanism of injury and/or physiologic criteria. It is not well established if existing triage criteria predict the need for intervention or impact morbidity and mortality. This study evaluated existing evidence for pediatric trauma triage. Questions defined a priori were as follows: (1) Do prehospital trauma triage criteria reduce mortality? (2) Do prehospital trauma scoring systems predict outcomes? (3) Do trauma center activation criteria predict outcomes? (4) Do trauma center activation criteria predict need for procedural or operative interventions? (5) Do trauma bay pediatric trauma scoring systems predict outcomes? (6) What secondary triage criteria for transfer of children exist?

METHODS

A structured, systematic review was conducted, and multiple databases were queried using search terms related to pediatric trauma triage. The literature search was limited to January 1990 to August 2019. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology was applied with the methodological index for nonrandomized studies tool used to assess the quality of included studies. Qualitative analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1,752 articles were screened, and 38 were included in the qualitative analysis. Twelve articles addressed questions 1 and 2, 21 articles addressed question 3 to 5, and five articles addressed question 6. Existing literature suggest that prehospital triage criteria or scoring systems do not predict or reduce mortality, although selected physiologic parameters may. In contrast, hospital trauma activation criteria can predict the need for procedures or surgical intervention and identify patients with higher mortality; again, physiologic signs are more predictive than mechanism of injury. Currently, no standardized secondary triage/transfer protocols exist.

CONCLUSION

Evidence supporting the utility of prehospital triage criteria for injured children is insufficient, while physiology-based trauma system activation criteria do appropriately stratify injured children. The absence of strong evidence supports the need for further prehospital and secondary transfer triage-related research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review study, level II.

A Systematic Review of Hospital Trauma Team Activation Criteria for Children

OBJECTIVES

Hospital trauma activation criteria are intended to identify children who are likely to require aggressive resuscitation or specific surgical interventions that are time sensitive and require the resources of a trauma team at the bedside. Evidence to support criteria is limited, and no prior publication has provided historical or current perspectives on hospital practices toward informing best practice. This study aimed to describe the published variation in (1) highest level of hospital trauma team activation criteria for pediatric patients and (2) hospital trauma team membership and (3) compare these finding to the current ACS recommendations.

METHODS

Using an Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations search, any published description of hospital trauma team activation criteria for children that used information captured in the prehospital setting was identified. Only studies of children were included. If the study included both adults and children, it was included if the number of children assessed with the criteria was included.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies spanning 20 years and 13,184 children were included. Hospital trauma team activation and trauma team membership were variable. Nearly all (92%) of the trauma criteria used physiologic factors. Penetrating trauma (83%) was frequently included in the trauma team activation criteria. Mechanisms of injury (52%) were least likely to be included in the highest level of activation. No predictable pattern of criterion adoption was found. Only 2 of the published criteria and 1 of published trauma team membership are consistent with the current American College of Surgeons recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Published hospital trauma team activation criteria and trauma team membership for children were variable. Future prospective studies are needed to define the optimal hospital trauma team activation criteria and trauma team membership and assess its impact on improving outcomes for children.

Managing moderately injured pediatric patients without immediate surgeon presence: 10 years later

PURPOSE

Beginning in 2003, the pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physician replaced the surgeon as the team leader for all level II trauma resuscitations at a busy pediatric trauma center. The purpose was to review the outcomes 10 years after implementing this practice change.

METHODS

Trauma registry data for all level II activations requiring admission were extracted for the 21 months (April 1, 2001-December 31, 2002) prior to policy change (period 1, **n=627) and compared to the admitted patients from the 10 subsequent years (2003-2013; period 2, n=2694). Data included demographics, length of stay (LOS), injury severity score (ISS), readmissions, complications, and mortality.

RESULTS

Mean ISS scores for admitted patients during period 1 (8.5) were higher than during period 2 (7.8). During period 1, 53.6% of patients underwent abdominal CT versus 41.8% in period 2 (p<.001), and the median ED LOS was 135 versus 191 minutes in period 2. From 2000 to 2003, 91% of patients seen as level II trauma alerts were admitted compared to 56.6% of patients in period 2 (p<0.001). There were no missed abdominal injuries identified, and readmission rate was low.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that level II trauma resuscitations can be safely evaluated and managed without immediate surgeon presence. Although ED LOS increased, admission rate and CT scan usage decreased significantly without an increase in missed injuries.

Establishing a standard for assessing the appropriateness of trauma team activation: a retrospective evaluation of two outcome measures

BACKGROUND

Trauma team activation (TTA) is a well-recognised standard of care to provide rapid stabilisation of patients with time-critical, life-threatening injuries. TTA is associated with a substantial use of valuable hospital resources that may adversely impact upon the care of other patients if not carefully balanced. This study aimed to determine which of the two outcome measures would be a better standard for assessing the appropriateness of TTA at a paediatric centre: retrospective major trauma classification as defined within our state, and the use of emergency department high-level resources as recently published by Falcone et al (Falcone Interventions; FI).

METHODS

Trauma registry data and patients' charts between February 2011 and June 2013 were reviewed. Over-triage and under-triage rates for TTA, using both major trauma and FIs as outcome measures, were compared.

RESULTS

Totally, 280 patients received TTA, 243 met major trauma definition and 102 received one or more FIs. The rates of over-triage and under-triage were 39.7% (95% CI 35.0 to 44.6%) and 30.5% (95% CI 26.2 to 35.2%), when the major trauma definition was used as the outcome measure, and 67.5% (95% CI 62.2 to 72.5%) and 10.8% (95% CI 7.9 to 14.8%) when FI was used. Only 17.1% (95% CI 11.4% to 24.7%) of the under-triaged patients using the major trauma definition received one or more FIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of TTA appropriateness varied significantly based on the outcome measure used. FIs better reflected the use of acute-care TTA-related resources compared with the major trauma definition, and it should be used as the gold standard to prospectively assess and refine TTA criteria.

Do prehospital criteria optimally assign injured children to the appropriate level of trauma team activation and emergency department disposition at a level I pediatric trauma center?

PURPOSE

To examine the association of prehospital criteria with the appropriate level of trauma team activation (TTA) and emergency department (ED) disposition among injured children at a level I pediatric trauma center.

METHODS

Injured children younger than 15 years and transported by emergency medical services (EMS) from the scene of injury between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2011 were identified using the institution's trauma registry. Logistic regression was used to study the main outcomes of interest, full TTA (FTTA) and ED disposition.

RESULTS

Out of 3,213 children, 1,991 were eligible and analyzed. Only 279 children initiated the FTTA and 73.9% were admitted. Having a chest injury, abnormal heart rate or Glasgow Coma Scale less than 9 (GCSLT9) in the field was associated with higher odds of initiating the FTTA (odds ratio [OR] = 3.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.54-7.20; OR = 2.59, CI 1.15-5.79 and OR = 2.67, CI 1.14-6.22, respectively). Children with the criteria above in addition to abdominal injury were more likely to be discharged to the ICU, OR or morgue compared to those without them.

CONCLUSION

Children with GCSLT9, abnormal heart rate, chest and abdominal injury showed a strong association with FTTA and higher resource utilization.

Trauma surgeon becomes consultant: evaluation of a protocol for management of intermediate-level trauma patients

PURPOSE

At our level 1 pediatric trauma center, 9-54 intermediate-level ("level 2") trauma activations are received per month. Previously, the surgery team was required to respond to and assume responsibility for all patients who had "level 2" trauma activations. In 8/2011, we implemented a protocol where the emergency room (ER) physician primarily manages these patients with trauma consultation for surgical evaluation or admission. The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the effects of the new protocol to ensure that patient safety and quality of care were maintained.

METHODS

We compared outcomes of patients treated PRE-implementation (10/2010-7/2011) and POST-implementation (9/2011-5/2012), including surgeon consultation rate, utilization of imaging and laboratory testing, ER length of stay, admission rate, and missed injuries or readmissions. Statistical analysis included chi-square and Student's t-test.

RESULTS

We identified 472 patients: 179 in the PRE and 293 in the POST period. The populations had similar baseline clinical characteristics. The surgical consultation rate in the POST period was only 42%, with no missed injuries or readmissions. The ER length of stay did not change. However, in the POST period there were significant decreases in the admission rate (73% to 44%) and the mean number of CT scans (1.4 to 1), radiographs (2.4 to 1.7), and laboratory tests (5.1 to 3.3) ordered in the emergency room (all p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Intermediate-level pediatric trauma patients can be efficiently and safely managed by pediatric emergency room physicians, with surgical consultation only as needed. The protocol change improved resource utilization by decreasing testing and admissions and streamlining resident utilization in an era of reduced duty hours.

A multicenter prospective analysis of pediatric trauma activation criteria routinely used in addition to the six criteria of the American College of Surgeons

BACKGROUND

The American College of Surgeons has defined six minimum activation criteria (ACS-6) for the highest level of trauma activations at trauma centers. The verification criteria also allow for the inclusion of additional criteria at the institution's discretion. The purpose of this prospective multicenter study was to evaluate the ACS-6 as well as commonly used activation criteria to evaluate overtriage and undertriage rates for pediatric trauma team activation.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected at nine pediatric trauma centers to examine 29 commonly used activation criteria. Patients meeting any of these criteria were evaluated for the use of high-level trauma resuscitation resources according to an expert consensus list. Patients requiring a resource but not meeting any activation criteria were included to evaluate undertriage rates.

RESULTS

During the 1-year study, a total of 656 patients were enrolled with a mean age of 8 years, a median Injury Severity Score of 14, and mortality of 11%. Using all criteria, 55% of patients would have been overtriaged and 9% would have been undertriaged. If only the ACS-6 were used, 24% of patients would have been overtriaged and 16% would have been undertriaged. Among activation criteria with more than 10 patients, those most predictive of using a high-level resource were a gunshot wound to the abdomen (92%), blood given before arrival (83%), traumatic arrest (83%), tachycardia/poor perfusion (83%), and age-appropriate hypotension (77%). The addition of tachycardia/poor perfusion and pretrauma center resuscitation with greater than 40 mL/kg results in eight criteria with an overtriage of 39% and an undertriage of 10.5%.

CONCLUSION

The ACS-6 provides a reliable overtriage or undertriage rate for pediatric patients. The inclusion of two additional criteria can further improve these rates while maintianing a simplified triage list for children.

Factors associated with the interfacility transfer of the pediatric trauma patient: implications for prehospital triage

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to identify prehospital factors associated with increased likelihood of interfacility transfer of pediatric trauma patients. Such factors might serve as a basis for improvements in future field pediatric trauma triage guidelines.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of children aged 12 years or younger with blunt, penetrating, or thermal injuries who were transported by ground emergency medical services from the scene to the emergency department of a Level I, II, or III trauma center within the Denver metropolitan area from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2008. Characteristics predicting subsequent interfacility transfer to a pediatric trauma center (PTC) were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 1673 patients were included in the analysis. Variables hypothesized to be most commonly associated with interfacility transfer were age, sex, mechanism of injury, body region of injury, and Glasgow Coma Scale score. The cohort included 1079 males and 593 females. Logistic regression analysis yielded the following as significant predictors of transfer: younger age (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.25), lower Glasgow Coma Scale score (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.16), the presence of burns (OR, 37.52; 95% CI, 7.3-191.7), non-accidental trauma (OR, 6.09; 95% CI, 2.44-15.25), falls (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.06-2.48), other motor vehicle-related incidents (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.08-5.19), abdominal injury (OR, 5.39; 95% CI, 2.31-12.55), head/neck injury (OR, 7.89; 95% CI, 4.21-14.77), limb injury (OR, 5.31; 95% CI, 2.78-10.16), and multiple injuries (OR, 13.01; 95% CI, 5.0-33.8).

CONCLUSIONS

Factors highly associated with transfer of an injured child from a non-PTC to a PTC included younger age, burns, non-accidental trauma, head/neck injury, and multiple injuries in younger children. Further investigation is warranted to determine whether these factors may have applicability in future improvements in field pediatric trauma patient triage guidelines.

Trauma activation: are we making the right call? A 3-year experience at a Level I pediatric trauma center

BACKGROUND

Trauma is the leading cause of death in children, accounting for half of all deaths in patients between birth and 18 years of age, and is the cause of a significant number of hospital admissions. We reviewed our experience at a Level I pediatric trauma center with a 2-level trauma activation (TA) system for mobilization of personnel over a 3-year period. The aim was to assess severity of injury of the trauma patients, resource use, and outcome.

METHODS

After obtaining institutional review board approval, a retrospective analysis of all trauma patients between January 2006 and December 2008 was performed. Data analyzed included number of admissions, level of TA (STAT vs ALERT), mechanism of injury, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, injury severity score (ISS), need for operative intervention, and survival.

RESULTS

In 3 years, there were 4502 patients entered. Trauma activation was initiated in 1315 patients (29.2%), divided between 211 STATs (4.7%) and 1104 ALERTs (24.5%). Mean patient age was 5.9 ± 4.1 years, 65% of the patients were boys, and blunt trauma accounted for 92% of the admissions. An ICU admission was required in 736 (16.3%) of the entire group, whereas 502 (38.2%) patients in the TA group were admitted to the ICU(1). The 154 STAT (21%) and 348 ALERT (47%) patients accounted for 68% of all ICU admissions(1). An ISS listed as severe (16-24) or very severe (>24) was found in 468 (10.4%) and 232 (5.2%) patients, respectively. An ISS listed as 16 or higher was found in 144 (68.2%) of the STATs and 264 (23.9%) of the ALERTs(1). Operative intervention was required in 2118 patients (47%). The overall mortality rate was 1.9%, and this increased to 5.8% in the TA group(1). There were 48 deaths (22.7%) in the STAT group, 29 deaths (2.6%) in the ALERT group, and 9 deaths (0.28%) in patients with no TA(1). When emergency department deaths were excluded, the remaining 60 deaths resulted in a mortality rate of 1.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our Level I pediatric trauma center manages a large volume of patients with significant acuity and, evidenced by a TA in 29% of the patients, a severe or very severe ISS in 16% of the patients, 16% of the patients requiring ICU admission, and 47% requiring operative intervention. The TA patients had markedly higher rates of ICU admission, ISS, and mortality. Deaths in the study were lower by almost an order of magnitude comparing TA STATs with TA ALERTs and TA ALERT patients with patients without TA. The TA criteria are in many ways very helpful and is integral to a Level I trauma center. However, opportunities were identified for improvement because of areas of "overutilization" and discordance between TA and ISS.

The role of the emergency pharmacist in trauma resuscitation

The clinical pharmacist in the emergency department is now commonly incorporated as a member of the emergency department trauma team. As such, the emergency pharmacist needs to have detailed knowledge of the pharmacotherapy of resuscitation and be able to apply the skills needed to function as a valuable member of this team. In addition to the traditional skills of the discipline of clinical pharmacy, the emergency pharmacist must be familiar with the intricacies of treating life-threatening injuries in an emergent setting and be able to anticipate the direction of the patient's care. The ability to provide valuable pharmacological interventions throughout the resuscitation and stabilization process requires familiarity with the process of resuscitation, including rapid sequence induction, analgesia and sedation, seizure prophylaxis, appropriate antibiotic and tetanus prophylaxis, intracranial pressure control, hemodynamic stabilization, and any other specific drug therapy that the clinical situation demands. This article discusses the aforementioned pharmacotherapeutic topics and describes the role of the Emergency Pharmacist on the ED trauma team.

Critically ill children in non-paediatric intensive care units: a survey, review and proposal for practice

Despite strong arguments in favour of centralising care of critically ill children to paediatric intensive care units, around 2000 children per year are cared for in non-paediatric intensive care units in Australia and New Zealand. This paper reports a survey of consultants from 13 such units that admitted over 50 children in 2002 and 2003, to find out what factors affect the decision to keep critically ill children locally or transfer them to a paediatric intensive care unit and what infrastructure existed to support local care of these children. The results of this survey form the basis for a proposal to improve care of critically ill children in the non-paediatric intensive care units. The four key elements of this proposal are: the use of protocols, routine consultation with the regional paediatric intensive care unit, the use of telemedicine, and enhancing skills and experience of local staff Evidence supporting these measures as well as the evidence for centralising care of critically ill children is reviewed.

Effect of emergency department care on outcomes in pediatric trauma: what approaches make a difference in quality of care?

Deriving evidence-based best practice for each phase or setting of trauma care is necessary to maximize best outcomes. There is a paucity of studies examining the association of provider training on pediatric trauma outcomes. Pivotal decisions (whether and where to transfer, diagnostic workup, and initial resuscitation) occur in this setting, yet there is little evidence relating to best practices in those areas. Classic process-performance measures such as time intervals during care (e.g., time to computerized tomography scan, time to operating room, etc.) or utilization measures (American College of Surgeons designation) are commonly used in the trauma center certification process, yet process-outcome links relevant to children are lacking. Although great advances have been made in the trauma care delivered to children, scientific proof is lacking and much more needs to be done to establish the evidence-based need to deliver the highest quality of pediatric trauma care.

The importance of a multidisciplinary approach in a child with major abdominal penetrating trauma

We present a case of a 2-year-old girl who had a lawn mower accident with subtotal gut evisceration, multiple ischemic intestinal lesions, hepatic and gastric wounds, amputation of the left forearm, and hypovolemic shock. Prompt and adequate management was carried out in tertiary level institution, based upon quick evaluation of the lesions, fluid resuscitation, surgical repair, and postoperative admission to the pediatric intensive care unit.

Trauma team activation and the impact on mortality

BACKGROUND

Trauma centers use injury mechanism, physiology, and anatomic criteria to determine the extent of trauma team activation (TTA). We examined whether physiologic variables in our three-tier TTA system stratified patients appropriately by injury severity and mortality.

METHODS

The trauma registry at our Level I trauma center was retrospectively reviewed for full (level 1 or L1), partial (level 2 or L2), and limited (level 3) adult TTA. Data were collected on age, injury severity score (ISS), hospital length of stay, systolic blood pressure (SBP), heart rate, respiratory rate (RR), Glasgow coma score (GCS), and intubation status. Penetrating injuries, traumatic arrests, and interfacility transfers were excluded. Data are median (25%75%). Statistical analysis included hazard ratios (HzR), Kruskal-Wallis, chi, and survival analyses. The p value overall was <0.05, and pair wise was <0.05 versus L1.

RESULTS

There were 494 adult TTAs for blunt injury from the scene out of 1,969 admissions. Variables associated with mortality (HzR; 95% confidence interval) by univariate analysis include SBP <90 (9.4; 4.2, 21.2), RR >29 or <10 (17.8; 4.8, 66.0), intubation status (4.5; 2.3, 8.9), and GCS <8 (9.7; 4.8, 19.9). When combined in a multivariate model to evaluate multiple predictors simultaneously, SBP <90 and GCS <8 appear to be the strongest predictors of mortality (RR and intubation were not significant in the presence of SBP and GCS). The three-tier system identified patients with increased ISS and early (< or =4 weeks) mortality risk. There was a statistically significant difference in survival between L1 and L2 at 38 days, but not for >38 days (p = 0.739).

CONCLUSIONS

TTA criteria selected patients with greater ISS and early mortality, but impact on long-term survival may not be appreciated. Full TTA criteria for blunt injury may be limited to GCS <8, SBP <90, RR >29 or <10, and intubation status.

The impact of managing moderately injured pediatric trauma patients without immediate surgeon presence

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the outcome of "minor resuscitation" trauma patients managed without the immediate presence of a surgeon.

METHODS

In 2003, our hospital replaced surgeons with pediatric emergency medicine physicians for level 2 (minor resuscitation) trauma alerts, whereas the level 1 (major resuscitation) alerts remained surgeon directed. We compared patients treated in the 3 years before (period 1) and after (period 2) this change. Patient records were analyzed for discharges, alert upgrades, Injury Severity Score (ISS), time to destination, and mortality.

RESULTS

There were 918 admissions and 93 discharges in period 1 compared with 815 admissions and 652 discharges in period 2. In period 1, 3% were upgraded to level 1 status compared with 9% in period 2 (P < .0001). The mean ISS of admitted patients and the percentage of critical (ISS >15) patients were greater in period 2 (P < .001). The time to inpatient floor was longer in period 2, but the elapsed times to operating room and to pediatric intensive care unit were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

Pediatric emergency medicine physicians discharged more patients than the surgeons, but also upgraded more to level 1 status. Level 2 trauma patients can be safely managed without immediate surgeon presence.

A leap in faith: the impact of removing the surgeon from the level II trauma response

BACKGROUND

Limitation of resident work hours has created the need to explore alternatives to surgeon presence during initial assessment and resuscitation for selected life-threatening injuries in children. We recently eliminated the requirement for surgeon presence during Level II alerts. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of this change on patient care.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of trauma alert activity was performed using data from our trauma registry. In March 2003, responsibility for level II alerts was transferred from the pediatric surgeons (PSs) to the Emergency Department (ED) physicians. We compared the activity in the 18-month period before this change (period 1; n = 627) to that afterward (period 2; n = 587). Outcome measures included injury severity score, emergency department length of stay, missed injuries, abdominal computed tomography use, and mortality. Data were analyzed using log-rank statistic, chi2, or t test, where appropriate, with significance level at P < .05.

RESULTS

During the entire study period, 1499 patients met the trauma alert activation criteria of which 1214 (81%) were level II alerts. The mean injury severity score for period 1 (8.5 +/- 7.3 SD) was similar to period 2 (9.0 +/- 7.1 SD). When ED physicians replaced PS for Level II alerts, ED length of stay increased from 135 minutes to 165 minutes (P < .001). In addition, the use of abdominal computed tomography was significantly decreased (53.6% vs 42.6%; P < .001). However, there were no missed injuries and no significant differences in the rate of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

When ED physicians replaced PS for Level II alerts, trauma room length of stay was increased, but use of abdominal imaging was decreased with no differences in rate of missed injury or mortality. Emergency Department physicians can safely replace PS during Level II alerts. These findings may be useful to institutions experiencing surgical workforce limitations for trauma alerts.

Pediatric major resuscitation--respiratory compromise as a criterion for mandatory surgeon presence

The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma has indicated that there are minimum criteria for a trauma surgeon to respond to a major resuscitation (MR) within 15 minutes. These criteria have been required for children without significant data to support their validity. Our hypothesis is that prehospital intubation/respiratory compromise (IRC) as a criterion to define an MR will be an accurate predictor.

METHODS

The trauma registry of a level I trauma center was used for data collection of age, injury severity score (ISS), IRC, mortality, hospital days, intensive care unit (ICU) days, and emergency operations. Chi2 with Yates correction and Mann-Whitney rank-sum testing was used for statistical analysis expressed as mean +/- SEM.

RESULTS

One hundred eighteen patients were encoded as MR. Forty patients had prehospital IRC and 78 patients did not. There were statistically significant differences seen in ISS, ICU length of stay, and mortality (P < .001). Forty-five percent of patients with IRC died. None of the patients without IRC died.

CONCLUSION

Injured children with prehospital IRC are significantly more likely to die, have a higher ISS, and a longer ICU length of stay. Prehospital respiratory distress in injured children in our trauma system is a reasonable criterion to define an MR in children.

Paediatric trauma teams in Australia

BACKGROUND

Trauma teams have been associated with improved survival probability of paediatric trauma patients. The present study seeks to estimate the use of trauma teams in Australian paediatric tertiary referral centres and describe their medical composition, leadership and criteria for activation.

METHODS

Australian paediatric tertiary referral centres were identified. A structured questionnaire assessing the presence, composition and means of activation of a trauma team was mailed to the 'Director, Emergency Department' of all identified hospitals. Three months later, all hospitals were contacted by telephone to complete and verify data collection.

RESULTS

Questionnaires were distributed to eight hospitals. Seventy-five per cent had an established trauma team. Hospitals without a trauma team claimed to have insufficient doctors to form a team and insufficient trauma caseload to justify a team. All trauma teams were potentially activated by prehospital paramedic data (field triage) and required a combination of anatomical, physiological and mechanistic criteria for activation. The two methods of mobilizing a trauma team were by dispatching a common call onto individual pagers (66%) or a specific trauma pager (33%) carried by trauma team members. Fifty per cent of hospitals had a two-tier, stratified trauma team response. All teams consisted of emergency, surgical and intensive care unit registrars. Trauma team leaders were emergency medicine specialists/registrars (33%), surgical registrars (33%) and non-defined (33%). Consultant surgeons were not members of any trauma team. Eighty-three per cent of trauma teams consisted of more junior members after hours. Fifty per cent of hospitals did not have a surgical registrar on site outside of business hours. Eighty-eight per cent of hospitals engaged in some form of trauma audit.

CONCLUSIONS

Trauma teams are utilized by most Australian paediatric tertiary referral centres, with fairly uniform medical composition and criteria for activation. Paediatric surgeons presently have limited leadership roles and membership of Australian paediatric trauma teams.

Alternative model for a pediatric trauma center: efficient use of physician manpower at a freestanding children's hospital

BACKGROUND

Freestanding children's hospitals may lack resources, especially surgical manpower, to meet American College of Surgeons trauma center criteria, and may organize trauma care in alternative ways.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

At a tertiary care children's hospital, attending trauma surgeons and anesthesiologists took out-of-hospital call and directed initial care for only the most severely injured patients, whereas pediatric emergency physicians directed care for patients with less severe injuries. Survival data were analyzed using TRISS methodology.

RESULTS

A total of 903 trauma patients were seen by the system during the period 10/1/96-6/30/01. Median Injury Severity Score was 16, and 508 of patients had Injury Severity Score > or =15. There were 83 deaths, 21 unexpected survivors, and 13 unexpected deaths. TRISS analysis showed that z-score was 4.39 and W-statistic was 3.07.

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality outcome from trauma in a pediatric hospital using this alternative approach to trauma care was significantly better than predicted by TRISS methodology.

Trauma stat and trauma minor: are we making the call appropriately?

OBJECTIVES

Trauma accounts for a significant number of pediatric emergency room visits and is the leading cause of death in pediatric patients over 1 year of age. To provide quality care, protocols are used to mobilize personnel to treat injured patients. We reviewed our experience at a level 1 pediatric trauma center, where a 2-tiered trauma activation protocol is used in treating children with significant injuries.

METHODS

We analyzed data in our trauma registry from 1994 to 1999 of patients with Injury Severity Score > or = 9 in whom trauma activations were called. Data reflected demographics, severity of injury, hospital course and outcome. Trauma activations were based on standard protocols that took physiologic status, anatomic area of injury, and mechanism of injury into account. Nineteen personnel were notified in a Trauma Stat Activation, and 8 were notified in a Trauma Minor Activation.

RESULTS

There were 470 trauma activations: Trauma Stat = 220 and Trauma Minor = 250. As a group, Trauma Stat patients were more hemodynamically unstable, had a lower GCS and a higher Injury Severity Score than Trauma Minor patients. Patients in the Trauma Stat group were also more likely to require intensive care and have a prolonged hospitalization. The Trauma Stat group had a mortality rate of 20%. There were no deaths in the Trauma Minor group.

CONCLUSIONS

Trauma activations result in heavy resource utilization and must be appropriate. The 2 trauma activation levels were associated with differences in injury severity, medical resource utilization, and outcome. With no deaths in the Trauma Minor group and a 20% mortality rate in the Trauma Stat group, we conclude that the protocol used was neither too conservative, nor too liberal.