Efficacy of anatomic and physiologic indicators versus mechanism of injury criteria for trauma activation in pediatric emergencies

Characteristics and predictors of intensive care unit admission in pediatric blunt abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Pediatric trauma patients sustaining blunt abdominal trauma (BAT) with intra-abdominal injury (IAI) are frequently admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). This study was performed to identify predictors for ICU admission following BAT.

METHODS

Prospective study of children (< 16 years) who presented to 14 Level-One Pediatric Trauma Centers following BAT over a 1-year period. Patients were categorized as ICU or non-ICU patients. Data collected included vitals, physical exam findings, laboratory results, imaging, and traumatic injuries. A multivariable hierarchical logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of ICU admission. Predictive ability of the model was assessed via tenfold cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (cvAUC).

RESULTS

Included were 2,182 children with 21% (n = 463) admitted to the ICU. On univariate analysis, ICU patients were associated with abnormal age-adjusted shock index, increased injury severity scores (ISS), lower Glasgow coma scores (GCS), traumatic brain injury (TBI), and severe solid organ injury (SOI). With multivariable logistic regression, factors associated with ICU admission were severe trauma (ISS > 15), anemia (hematocrit < 30), severe TBI (GCS < 8), cervical spine injury, skull fracture, and severe solid organ injury. The cvAUC for the multivariable model was 0.91 (95% CI 0.88-0.92).

CONCLUSION

Severe solid organ injury and traumatic brain injury, in association with multisystem trauma, appear to drive ICU admission in pediatric patients with BAT. These results may inform the design of a trauma bay prediction rule to assist in optimizing ICU resource utilization after BAT.

STUDY DESIGN

Prognosis study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1

Prehospital personnel discretion pediatric trauma team activations: Too much of a good thing?

PURPOSE

Trauma team activation is essential to provide rapid assessment of injured patients, however excessive utilization can overburden systems. We aimed to identify predictors of over triage and evaluate impact of prehospital personal discretion trauma activations on the over triage rate.

METHODS

Retrospective comparative study of pediatric trauma patients (<18 years) evaluated after activation of the trauma team to those evaluated as a trauma consult treated between 2010 and 2013. Cohort matching of trauma activated and consult patients was done on the basis of patients' age and ISS.

RESULTS

1363 patients including 359 trauma team activations were evaluated. Median age was 6 years, Injury Severity Score (ISS) 4, 116 (8.5%) required operative intervention and 20 (1.4%) died. Matched analysis using age and ISS showed trauma activated patients were more likely to have penetrating MOI (4.7% vs.1.7%; p = 0.03) and need ICU admission(32.9% vs.16.7%; p = 0.0001). State of Florida discrete criteria based trauma activated patients when compared to paramedic discretion activations had a higher ISS (9 vs.5; p = 0.014), need for ICU admission (36.5% vs.20.4%; p = 0.004), ICU LOS(2 vs.0 days; p = 0.02), hospital LOS(2 vs.2 days; p = 0.014) and higher likelihood of death(4.9% vs.0%;p = 0.0001). Moreover, paramedic discretion trauma activated patients were similar to trauma consult patients in terms of ISS score(p = 0.86), need for ICU admission(p = 0.86), operative intervention(p = 0.86), death(p = 0.86) and hospital LOS(p = 0.86), with a considerably higher cost of care(p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSION

Discrete criteria-based trauma team activations appear to more reliably identify patients likely to benefit from initial multidisciplinary management.

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.

A Consensus-Based Criterion Standard for the Requirement of a Trauma Team

BACKGROUND

Trauma team activation (TTA) represents a considerable expenditure of trauma centre resources. It is mainly triggered by field triage criteria. The overall quality of the criteria may be evaluated based on the rate of over- and undertriage. However, there is no gold standard that defines which adult patients truly require a trauma team. The objective of this study was to develop consensus-based criteria defining the necessity for a trauma team.

METHODS

A consensus group was formed by trauma specialists experienced in emergency and trauma care with a specific interest in field triage and having previously participated in guideline development. A literature search was conducted to identify criteria that have already been used or suggested. The initial list of criteria was discussed in two Delphi round and two consensus conferences. The entire process of discussion and voting was highly standardized and extensively documented, resulting in a final list of criteria.

RESULTS

Initially 95 criteria were identified. This was subsequently reduced to 20 final criteria to appropriately indicate the requirement for attendance of a trauma team. The criteria address aspects related to injury severity, admission to an intensive care unit, death within 24 h, need for specified invasive procedures, need for surgical and/or interventional radiological procedures, and abnormal vital signs within a defined time period.

CONCLUSIONS

The selected criteria may be applied as a tool for research and quality control concerning TTA. However, future studies are necessary to further evaluate for possible redundancy in criteria that may allow for further reduction in criteria.

Correlation of Level of Trauma Activation With Emergency Department Intervention

BACKGROUND

In-hospital trauma team activation criteria are formulated to identify severely injured patients requiring specialized multidisciplinary care. Efficacy of trauma activation (TA) criteria is commonly measured by emergency department (ED) disposition, injury severity score, and mortality. Necessity of critical ED interventions is another measure that has been proposed to evaluate the appropriateness of TA criteria.

METHODS

Two-year retrospective cohort study of 1715 patients from our trauma registry at a Level 1 pediatric trauma center. We abstracted data on acute interventions, level and criterion of TA, ED disposition, and mortality. We report odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), positive predictive value, and frequency of acute interventions.

RESULTS

Trauma activation was initiated for 947 (55%) of the 1715 patients. There were 426 ED interventions performed on 235 patients (14%); 67.8% were in level 1 activations; 17.6% in level 2, and 14.6% in level 3. Highest-level activations were highly associated with need for ED interventions (OR, 16.1; 95% CI, 11.5-22.4). The ORs for requiring an ED intervention were low for lower level activations (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3-0.5), trauma service consults (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.2-0.4), and certain mechanism-based criteria. The ORs for ED intervention for isolated motor vehicle collision (0.2; 95% CI, 0.1-0.7), isolated all-terrain vehicle rollover (0.4; 95% CI, 0.1-1.7), and suspected spinal cord injury (0.5; 95% CI, 0.1-3.7) were significantly lower than 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Highest-level activation criteria correlate with high utilization of ED resources and interventions. Lower level activation criteria and trauma service consult criteria are not highly correlated with need for ED interventions. Downgrading isolated motor vehicle collision and all-terrain vehicle rollovers and suspected spinal cord injury to lower level activations could decrease the overtriage rate, and adding age-specific bradycardia as a physiologic criterion could improve our undertriage rate.

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.

Multidisciplinary approach to decrease pediatric trauma undertriage

BACKGROUND

Trauma activation and/or leveling criteria are designed to balance the potential harm to individual patients from undertriage (UT) of severe injuries versus overutilization of resources from overtriage (OT) of lesser injuries. The American College of Surgeons (ACS) recommends an acceptable UT rate ≤5% and OT 25%-50%. To improve UT or OT, an intervention was performed to (1) improve accuracy in following established leveling criteria and (2) modify activation criteria in an evidence-based manner to better identify severely injured children.

METHODS

Results from a prospective, interventional process improvement study performed at an ACS-verified level I pediatric trauma center are reported. The baseline period included all pediatric trauma patients who met registry inclusion criteria for 2010. The intervention period included two consecutive 3-mo periods in 2011-2012; phase I of the study involved moving the leveling responsibility from emergency department physicians to the nursing care team leaders. Phase II of the study implemented revised leveling criteria. Sustainability was assessed by evaluating data from 2014.

RESULTS

In phase I, accuracy in assigned trauma activation level improved from 70% to 99%. UT decreased 10%-8%, and OT decreased 37.5%-33.3%. In phase II, UT decreased 8%-5.1%, and OT increased 33%-40%. Adherence to the activation criteria remained stable (95%). For 2014, UT was 5.3% and OT was 18.2% demonstrating sustainability.

CONCLUSIONS

Shifting trauma leveling responsibilities to nursing care team leaders improved accuracy. Revising the activation criteria to include Center for Disease Control and ACS guidelines, as well as tailoring the activation criteria to the program-specific population, further reduced UT rates in a sustainable fashion.

Paediatric trauma systems and their impact on the health outcomes of severely injured children: An integrative review

BACKGROUND

Injury is a leading cause of death and disability for children. Regionalised trauma systems have improved outcomes for severely injured adults, however the impact of adult orientated trauma systems on the outcomes of severely injured children remains unclear.

AIMS

This research aims to identify the impact of trauma systems on the health outcomes of children following severe injury.

METHODS

Integrative review with data sourced from Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and hand searched references. Abstracts were screened for inclusion/exclusion criteria with fifty nine articles appraised for quality, analysed and synthesised into 3 main categories.

RESULTS

The key findings from this review include: (1) a lack of consistency of prehospital and inhospital triage criteria for severely injured children leading to missed injuries, secondary transfer and poor utilisation of finite resources; (2) severely injured children treated at paediatric trauma centres had improved outcomes when compared to those treated at adult trauma centres, particularly younger children; (3) major causes of delays to secondary transfer are unnecessary imaging and failure to recognise the need for transfer; (4) a lack of functional or long term outcomes measurements identified in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Research designed to identify the best processes of care and describe the impacts of trauma systems on the long term health outcomes of severely injured children is required. Ideally all phases of care including prehospital, paediatric triage trauma criteria, hospital type and interfacility transfer should be included, focusing on timeliness and appropriateness of care. Outcome measures should include long term functional outcomes in addition to mortality.

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.

The advantages of early trauma team activation in the management of major trauma patients who underwent exploratory laparotomy

Purpose

Trauma team activation (TTA) has been shown to have fundamental impact on trauma patients' outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of use of a new TTA protocol in the management of major trauma patients who underwent exploratory laparotomy.

Methods

The medical records of trauma patients who had been treated by the new TTA protocol (NT) over 18 months were compared with those of trauma patients treated by the old TTA protocol (OT) over 18 months. Comparisons between the two groups in terms of the time interval between accident and emergency room (ER) arrival, between ER arrival and CT scanning, between ER arrival and operating room (OR) presentation, between accident and OR presentation, mean intensive care unit (ICU) stay, mean hospital stay, mortality within 24 hours, mean mortality within one month, and overall mortality were performed using the Pearson chi-squared test and Student t-test.

Results

The time interval between accident and ER arrival, between ER arrival and CT scanning, between ER arrival and OR presentation, and between accident and OR presentation was found to have decreased significantly with the use of NT compared to OT. However, the mean ICU stay, mean hospital stay, mortality within 24 hours, mortality within one month, and overall mortality were found not to have improved.

Conclusion

While initiation of early TTA can shorten the time interval in the management of trauma patients, it may not improve patient outcomes.

Trauma System Overtriage: Are We on Track?

The American College of Surgeons (ACS) recommends trauma overtriage rate (OT) below 50 per cent to maximize efficiency while ensuring optimal care. This retrospective study was undertaken to evaluate OT rates in our Level I trauma center using the most recent criteria and guidelines. OT rates during a 12-month period were measured using six definitions based on combinations of Injury Severity Score (ISS), length of hospital stay (LOS, in days), procedures, and disposition after the emergency department. Reason for trauma activation was 55 per cent criteria, 16 per cent guidelines, 11 per cent paramedic judgment, five per cent no reason, and 13 per cent no documentation. OT rates ranged from 22.6 per cent (ISS less than 9, LOS 1 day or less, no consults) to 48.2 per cent (ISS less than 9, LOS 3 days or less, with procedures/consults) and were in compliance with ACS recommendations. Physiologic assessment criteria and anatomic injury had the lowest OT rates and contained all mortalities. Passenger space intrusion (PSI), pedestrian versus automobile (criterion and guideline), and extrication (guideline) all had consistently high rates of OT. We conclude that PSI should be reduced to a guideline, the pedestrian versus automobile criterion and guideline should be combined, and extrication could be removed from the triage scheme.