Development of trauma systems in Europe-reports from England, Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain

Trauma Connect Clinic: Continuing the trauma case management model for patients affected by traumatic injuries: A quality improvement initiative

BACKGROUND

A case-management model of care is frequently used in acute-care settings for patients with major traumatic injuries; however, its application to trauma follow-up care after hospital discharge remains unclear.

AIM

To describe the services provided by the Trauma Connect Clinic (TCC): a NP- led case management model, in trauma follow-up care.

METHODS

An exploratory descriptive study design was used. Data collected included patient and injury characteristics, clinic activities, attendance rates, referral patterns and complications.

RESULTS

Three-hundred and twenty-four TCC appointments were scheduled for 194 patients (n = 302) with an attendance rate of 93% (n = 302). Ongoing health issues included pain (n = 22, 37%), thrombotic events (n = 8, 13%) and infection (n = 7, 12%). Clinic activity included 77 referrals to the wider MDT (n = 77), radiology reviews (n = 225) and 39 prescribing events, consisting mainly of analgesia.

CONCLUSION

A case management model can successfully deliver trauma follow-up care and efficiently use limited resources. Key elements involve careful assessment and management of patients' physical and emotional needs. Evaluation of longer-term outcomes of this model of care in trauma settings is required.

Does the implementation of a trauma system affect injury-related morbidity and economic outcomes? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Trauma accounts for a huge burden of disease worldwide. Trauma systems have been implemented in multiple countries across the globe, aiming to link and optimise multiple aspects of the trauma care pathway, and while they have been shown to reduce overall mortality, much less is known about their cost-effectiveness and impact on morbidity.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review to explore the impact the implementation of a trauma system has on morbidity, quality of life and economic outcomes, in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. All comparator study types published since 2000 were included, both retrospective and prospective in nature, and no limits were placed on language. Data were reported as a narrative review.

RESULTS

Seven articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria, all of which reported a pre-trauma and post-trauma system implementation comparison in high-income settings. The overall study quality was poor, with all studies demonstrating a severe risk of bias. Five studies reported across multiple types of trauma patients, the majority describing a positive impact across a variety of morbidity and health economic outcomes following trauma system implementation. Two studies focused specifically on traumatic brain injury and did not demonstrate any impact on morbidity outcomes.

DISCUSSION

There is currently limited and poor quality evidence that assesses the impact that trauma systems have on morbidity, quality of life and economic outcomes. While trauma systems have a fundamental role to play in high-quality trauma care, morbidity and disability data can have large economic and cultural consequences, even if mortality rates have improved. The sociocultural and political context of the surrounding healthcare infrastructure must be better understood before implementing any trauma system, particularly in resource-poor and fragile settings.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022348529 LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Trends in the incidence of rib and sternal fractures: A nationwide study of the global burden of disease database, 1990-2019

INTRODUCTION

Fractures of the ribs and sternum are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Characterization of the injury burden across England is necessary to inform and evaluate developments in trauma care and infrastructure, however is yet to be comprehensively undertaken. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe trends in the incidence of sternal and rib fractures across England between 1990 and 2019.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Age-standardised incidence rates (ASIRs) for rib and sternal fractures in males and females were extracted from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study by all causes, falls and road traffic collisions for 9 sub-regions of England. Temporal trends within the study period were analysed using Joinpoint regression analysis.

RESULTS

The overall ASIRs in England in 2019 were 30.34/100,000 and 46.02/100,000 for females and males, respectively. Between 1990 and 2019, the estimated overall percentage change across England was +0.20 % among females and -7.05 % among males. A statistically significant increase in ASIR was observed in all 9 sub-regions of England among females from 2014-2019 (p<0.001). Among males, a statistically significant increase in ASIR was observed in 7 of the 9 regions from 2014-2019 (p<0.001) and in the remaining 2 regions from 2015-2019 (p<0.001).

DISCUSSION

Increasing ASIRs of rib and sternal fractures were observed among females and decreasing ASIRs among males, with overall ASIRs higher among males. Developments in trauma infrastructure and associated variations in diagnostic and management strategies over the observation period likely contribute to changes in the national injury burden. The findings are suggestive of the importance of ongoing financial investment in trauma infrastructure and of clear clinical guidelines to manage an increasing national injury burden.

Maturation of trauma systems in Europe

PURPOSE

To provide an overview of trauma system maturation in Europe.

METHODS

Maturation was assessed using a self-evaluation survey on prehospital care, facility-based trauma care, education/training, and quality assurance (scoring range 3-9 for each topic), and key infrastructure elements (scoring range 7-14) that was sent to 117 surgeons involved in trauma, orthopedics, and emergency surgery, from 24 European countries. Average scores per topic were summed to create a total score on a scale from 19 to 50 per country. Scores were compared between countries and between geographical regions, and correlations between scores on different sections were assessed.

RESULTS

The response rate was 95%. On the scale ranging from 19 to 50, the mean (SD, range) European trauma system maturity score was 38.5 (5.6, 28.2-48.0). Prehospital care had the highest mean score of 8.2 (0.5, 6.9-9.0); quality assurance scored the lowest 5.9 (1.7, 3.2-8.5). Facility-based trauma care was valued 6.9 (1.4, 4.1-9.0), education and training 7.0 (1.2, 5.2-9.0), and key infrastructure elements 10.3 (1.6, 7.6-13.5). All aspects of trauma care maturation were strongly correlated (r > 0.6) except prehospital care. End scores of Northern countries scored significantly better than Southern countries (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

The level of development of trauma care systems in Europe varies greatly. Substantial improvements in trauma systems in several European countries are still to be made, especially regarding quality assurance and key infrastructure elements, such as implementation of a lead agency to oversee the trauma system, and funding for growth, innovation and research.

Trauma systems in high socioeconomic index countries in 2050

Considerable political, structural, environmental and epidemiological change will affect high socioeconomic index (SDI) countries over the next 25 years. These changes will impact healthcare provision and consequently trauma systems. This review attempts to anticipate the potential impact on trauma systems and how they could adapt to meet the changing priorities. The first section describes possible epidemiological trajectories. A second section exposes existing governance and funding challenges, how these can be met, and the need to incorporate data and information science into a learning and adaptive trauma system. The last section suggests an international harmonization of trauma education to improve care standards, optimize immediate and long-term patient needs and enhance disaster preparedness and crisis resilience. By demonstrating their capacity for adaptation, trauma systems can play a leading role in the transformation of care systems to tackle future health challenges.

Continuous improvement in optimizing the timing of axial, hip, and femoral fracture fixation

Benefits of early stabilization of femoral shaft fractures, in mitigation of pulmonary and other complications, have been recognized over the past decades. Investigation into the appropriate level of resuscitation, and other measures of readiness for definitive fixation, versus a damage control strategy have been ongoing. These principles are now being applied to fractures of the thoracolumbar spine, pelvis, and acetabulum. Systems of trauma care are evolving to encompass attention to expeditious and safe management of not only multiply injured patients with these major fractures, but also definitive care for hip and periprosthetic fractures, which pose a similar burden of patient recumbency until stabilized. Future directions regarding refinement of patient resuscitation, assessment, and treatment are anticipated, as is the potential for data sharing and registries in enhancing trauma system functionality.

The East of England dental trauma service

BACKGROUND

Current evidence suggests traumatic dental injuries can be difficult to manage in primary care due to uncommon occurrence and challenging patient presentations. Such factors may contribute to general dental practitioners lacking experience and confidence in the assessment, treatment and management of traumatic dental injuries. Furthermore, there are anecdotal accounts of patients presenting to accident and emergency (A&E) services with a traumatic dental injury, which could be placing avoidable strain on secondary care services. For these reasons, a novel primary care-led dental trauma service has been established in the East of England.

METHODS

This brief report shares our experiences of establishing this dental trauma service, titled 'Think T's'. It aims to provide effective trauma care across an entire region by a dedicated team of experienced clinicians from primary care settings to reduce inappropriate attendance to secondary care services and upskill colleagues in dental traumatology.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Since its inception, the dental trauma service has been public-facing and has managed referrals from a range of sources which include general medical practitioners, A&E clinicians and ambulance services. The service has been well received and has been seeking to integrate with the Directory of Services as well as NHS 111.

Scoping review of the literature to ascertain how follow-up care is provided to major trauma patients post discharge from acute care

OBJECTIVES

Survival following traumatic injury has increased, requiring ongoing patient follow-up. While longitudinal outcomes of trauma patients are reported, little is known about optimal delivery of follow-up service for this group. The aim of this scoping review was to identify and describe the structure, process and outcomes of postdischarge follow-up services for patients who sustained major trauma.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

This scoping review was conducted by searching CINAHL, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Articles were screened by three independent reviewers. The data of selected articles were organised in the categories of the Donabedian quality framework: structure, processes and outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-six articles were included after screening by title/abstract then full text against the inclusion/exclusion criteria; 92% (n=24) were from the USA.Follow-up services were provided by designated trauma centres and delivered by a mixture of health disciplines. Delivery of follow-up was multimodal (in person/telehealth). Protocols and guidelines helped to deliver follow-up care for non-physician led services.Ongoing health issues including missed injuries, pain and infection were identified. No standardised criteria were established to determine recipients, the timing or frequency of follow-up was identified. Patients who engaged with follow-up services were more likely to participate in other health services. Patients reported satisfaction with follow-up care.

CONCLUSION

There are wide variations in how follow-up services for major trauma patients are provided. Further evaluation should focus on patient, family and organisational outcomes. Identifying who is most likely to benefit, when and how follow-up care is delivered are important next steps in improving outcomes.

A characterization of trauma laparotomies in a scandinavian setting: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Despite treatment advances, trauma laparotomy continuous to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Most of the literature originates from high volume centers, whereas patient characteristics and outcomes in a Scandinavian setting is not well described. The objective of this study is to characterize treatments and outcomes of patients undergoing trauma laparotomy in a Scandinavian setting and compare this to international reports.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed in the Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet (CUHR). All patients undergoing a trauma laparotomy within the first 24 h of admission between January 1st 2019 and December 31st 2020 were included. Collected data included demographics, trauma mechanism, injuries, procedures performed and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 1713 trauma patients were admitted to CUHR of which 98 patients underwent trauma laparotomy. Penetrating trauma accounted for 16.6% of the trauma population and 66.3% of trauma laparotomies. Median time to surgery after arrival at the trauma center (TC) was 12 min for surgeries performed in the Emergency Department (ED) and 103 min for surgeries performed in the operating room (OR). A total of 14.3% of the procedures were performed in the ED. A damage control strategy (DCS) approach was chosen in 18.4% of cases. Our rate of negative laparotomies was 17.3%. We found a mortality rate of 8.2%. The total median length of stay was 6.1 days.

CONCLUSION

The overall rates, findings, and outcomes of trauma laparotomies in this Danish cohort is comparable to reports from similar Western European trauma systems.

An economic evaluation of triage tools for patients with suspected severe injuries in England

BACKGROUND

Many health care systems triage injured patients to major trauma centres (MTCs) or local hospitals by using triage tools and paramedic judgement. Triage tools are typically assessed by whether patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 16 go to an MTC and whether patients with an ISS < 16 are sent to their local hospital. There is a trade-off between sensitivity and specificity of triage tools, with the optimal balance being unknown. We conducted an economic evaluation of major trauma triage tools to identify which tool would be considered cost-effective by UK decision makers.

METHODS

A patient-level, probabilistic, mathematical model of a UK major trauma system was developed. Patients with an ISS ≥ 16 who were only treated at local hospitals had worse outcomes compared to being treated in an MTC. Nine empirically derived triage tools, from a previous study, were examined so we assessed triage tools with realistic trade-offs between triage tool sensitivity and specificity. Lifetime costs, lifetime quality adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each tool and compared to maximum acceptable ICERs (MAICERs) in England.

RESULTS

Four tools had ICERs within the normal range of MAICERs used by English decision makers (£20,000 to £30,000 per QALY gained). A low sensitivity (28.4%) and high specificity (88.6%) would be cost-effective at the lower end of this range while higher sensitivity (87.5%) and lower specificity (62.8%) was cost-effective towards the upper end of this range. These results were sensitive to the cost of MTC admissions and whether MTCs had a benefit for patients with an ISS between 9 and 15.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost-effective triage tool depends on the English decision maker's MAICER for this health problem. In the usual range of MAICERs, cost-effective prehospital trauma triage involves clinically suboptimal sensitivity, with a proportion of seriously injured patients (at least 10%) being initially transported to local hospitals. High sensitivity trauma triage requires development of more accurate decision rules; research to establish if patients with an ISS between 9 and 15 benefit from MTCs; or, inefficient use of health care resources to manage patients with less serious injuries at MTCs.

Important learning points arising from the focused issue dedicated to the Terror and Disaster Surgical Care (TDSC®) course on mass casualty incident management

The Terror and Disaster Surgical Care (TDSC®) course on mass casualty incident management was formulated in Germany by military medical personnel, who have been deployed to conflict areas, but also work in hospitals open for the lay public. In this manuscript we discuss different concepts and ideas taught in this course as these are described in a focused issue recently published in the European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. We provide reinforcement for some of the ideas conveyed. We provide alternative views for others. Injuries following explosions are different from blunt and penetrating trauma and at times demand a different approach. There are probably several ways to manage a mass casualty incident depending on the setup of the organization. An open discussion on the topics presented in the manuscripts included in the focused issue on military and disaster surgery should enrich everyone.

Time to definitive care within major trauma networks in England

BACKGROUND

Significant mortality improvements have been reported following the implementation of English trauma networks. Timely transfer of seriously injured patients to definitive care is a key indicator of trauma network performance. This study evaluated timelines from emergency service (EMS) activation to definitive care between 2013 and 2016.

METHODS

An observational study was conducted on data collected from the UK national clinical audit of major trauma care of patients with an Injury Severity Score above 15. Outcomes included time from EMS activation to: arrival at a trauma unit (TU) or major trauma centre (MTC); to CT; to urgent surgery; and to death.

RESULTS

Secondary transfer was associated with increased time to urgent surgery (median 7·23 (i.q.r. 5·48-9·28) h versus 4·37 (3·00-6·57) h for direct transfer to MTC; P < 0·001) and an increased crude mortality rate (19·6 (95 per cent c.i. 16·9 to 22·3) versus 15·7 (14·7 to 16·7) per cent respectively). CT and urgent surgery were performed more quickly in MTCs than in TUs (2·00 (i.q.r. 1·55-2·73) versus 3·15 (2·17-4·63) h and 4·37 (3·00-6·57) versus 5·37 (3·50-7·65) h respectively; P < 0·001). Transfer time and time to CT increased between 2013 and 2016 (P < 0·001). Transfer time, time to CT, and time to urgent surgery varied significantly between regional networks (P < 0·001).

CONCLUSION

Secondary transfer was associated with significantly delayed imaging, delayed surgery, and increased mortality. Key interventions were performed more quickly in MTCs than in TUs.