A Call for Consensus on Methodology and Terminology to Improve Comparability in the Study of Preventable Prehospital Trauma Deaths: A Systematic Literature Review

Moving beyond audit: driving system learning using a novel mortality classification system in a tertiary training hospital in Kenya

Clinical classification systems have proliferated since the APGAR score was introduced in 1953. Numerical scores and classification systems enable qualitative clinical descriptors to be transformed into categorical data, with both clinical utility and ability to provide a common language for learning. The clarity of classification rubrics embedded in a mortality classification system provides the shared basis for discussion and comparison of results. Mortality audits have been long seen as learning tools, but have tended to be siloed within a department and driven by individual learner need. We suggest that the learning needs of the system are also important. Therefore, the ability to learn from small mistakes and problems, rather than just from serious adverse events, remains facilitated.We describe a mortality classification system developed for use in the low-resource context and how it is 'fit for purpose,' able to drive both individual trainee, departmental and system learning. The utility of this classification system is that it addresses the low-resource context, including relevant factors such as limited prehospital emergency care, delayed presentation, and resource constraints. We describe five categories: (1) anticipated death or complication following terminal illness; (2) expected death or complication given clinical situation, despite taking preventive measures; (3) unexpected death or complication, not reasonably preventable; (4) potentially preventable death or complication: quality or systems issues identified and (5) unexpected death or complication resulting from medical intervention. We document how this classification system has driven learning at the individual trainee level, the departmental level, supported cross learning between departments and is being integrated into a comprehensive system-wide learning tool.

A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of In-Hospital Mortality between Dedicated Regional Trauma Centers and Emergency Medical Centers in the Republic of Korea

Background

In the Republic of Korea, a trauma care system was not created until 2012, at which point regional trauma centers (RTCs) were established nationwide. In accordance with the national emergency care system and legislation, regional and local emergency medical centers (EMCs) also treat patients presenting with trauma. The aim of the present study was to assess whether treatment in RTCs is truly associated with better patient outcomes than that in EMCs by means of propensity score-matched comparisons and to identify populations that would benefit from treatment in RTCs.

Methods

This study analyzed the data of patients with consecutive emergency visits between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018, collected in the National Emergency Department Information System registry. Data from RTCs, designated regional EMCs, or local EMCs were included; data from smaller emergency departments were excluded because, in Korea, dedicated RTCs are established only in hospitals with regional or local EMCs. Propensity scores for treatment in RTCs or EMCs were estimated by logistic regression using linear terms. Mortality rates in RTCs and EMCs were compared between the matched samples.

Results

The in-hospital mortality rates in the matched cases treated in RTCs and EMCs were 1.4% and 1.6%, respectively. The odds ratio for in-hospital mortality in RTCs over EMCs was 0.984 (95% confidence interval: 0.813–1.191). Among the subgroups evaluated, the subgroup of patients with injuries involving the chest or lower limbs showed a significant difference in the in-hospital mortality rate.

Conclusion

There was no significant difference in the overall severity-adjusted mortality rate between patients treated in RTCs and EMCs. Treatment in an RTC might benefit those with injuries involving the chest or lower limbs.

Preventable Deaths in Multiple Trauma Patients: The Importance of Auditing and Continuous Quality Improvement

BACKGROUND

Management errors during pre-hospital care, triage process and resuscitation have been widely reported as the major source of preventable and potentially preventable deaths in multiple trauma patients. Common tools for defining whether it is a preventable, potentially preventable or non-preventable death include the Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS^®) clinical guideline, the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS). Therefore, these surrogated scores were utilized in reviewing the study's trauma services.

METHODS

Trauma data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2018. All cases of trauma death were discussed and audited by the Hospital Trauma Committee on a regular basis. Standardized form was used to document the patient's management flow and details in every case during the meeting, and the final verdict (whether death was preventable or not) was agreed and signed by every member of the team. The reasons for the death of the patients were further classified into severe injuries, inappropriate/delayed examination, inappropriate/delayed treatment, wrong decision, insufficient supervision/guidance or lack of appropriate guidance.

RESULTS

A total of 1913 trauma patients were admitted during the study period, 82 of whom were identified as major trauma (either ISS > 15 or trauma team was activated). Among the 82 patients with major trauma, eight were trauma-related deaths, one of which was considered a preventable death and the other 7 were considered unpreventable. The decision from the hospital's performance improvement and patient safety program indicates that for every trauma patient, basic life support principles must be followed in the course of primary investigations for bedside trauma series X-ray (chest and pelvis) and FAST scan in the resuscitation room by a person who meets the criteria for trauma team activation recommended by ATLS^®.

CONCLUSION

Mechanisms to rectify errors in the management of multiple trauma patients are essential for improving the quality of trauma care. Regular auditing in the trauma service is one of the most important parts of performance improvement and patient safety program, and it should be well established by every major trauma center in Mainland China. It can enhance the trauma management processes, decision-making skills and practical skills, thereby continuously improving quality and reducing mortality of this group of patients.

Potential survivability of prehospital injury deaths in New Zealand: a cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Acknowledging a notable gap in available evidence, this study aimed to assess the survivability of prehospital injury deaths in New Zealand.

METHODS

A cross-sectional review of prehospital injury death postmortems (PM) undertaken during 2009-2012. Deaths without physical injuries (eg, drownings, suffocations, poisonings), where there was an incomplete body, or insufficient information in the PM, were excluded. Documented injuries were scored using the AIS and an ISS derived. Cases were classified as survivable (ISS <25), potentially survivable (ISS 25-49) and non-survivable (ISS >49).

RESULTS

Of the 1796 cases able to be ISS scored, 11% (n=193) had injuries classified as survivable, 28% (n=501) potentially survivable and 61% (n=1102) non-survivable. There were significant differences in survivability by age (p=0.017) and intent (p<0.0001). No difference in survivability was observed by sex, ethnicity, day of week, seasonality or distance to advanced-level hospital care. 'Non-survivable' injuries occurred more commonly among those with multiple injuries, transport-related injuries and aged 15-29 year. The majority of 'survivable' cases were deceased when found. Among those alive when found, around half had received either emergency medical services (EMS) or bystander care. One in five survivable cases were classified as having delays in receiving care.

DISCUSSION

In New Zealand, the majority of injured people who die before reaching hospital do so from non-survivable injuries. More than one third have either survivable or potentially survivable injuries, suggesting an increased need for appropriate bystander first aid, timeliness of EMS care and access to advanced-level hospital care.

Development and Validation of a Controlled Vocabulary: An OWL Representation of Organizational Structures of Trauma Centers and Trauma Systems

In trauma care and trauma care research there exists an implementation gap regarding a consistent controlled vocabulary to describe organizational aspects of trauma centers and trauma systems. This paper describes the development and evaluation of a controlled vocabulary for trauma care organizations. We give a detailed description of the involvement of domain experts in the domain analysis workflow and the authoring of definitions and additional term descriptions. Finally, the paper details the evaluation methodology to assess the initial version of the controlled vocabulary. The results of the evaluation show that our development process yields terms most of which find approval from domain experts not involved in the development. In addition, our evaluation tools resulted in valuable domain expert input to optimize the controlled vocabulary.

High Mortality from Major Vascular Trauma in Traffic Accidents: A Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Injuries involving major arteries are an important cause of mortality and morbidity, most often from road traffic accidents. Our aim was to study the outcome of major vascular trauma from traffic accidents in an entire population, including patients who die at the scene and those who reach hospital alive.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of all patients who sustained major vascular trauma in traffic accidents in Iceland from 2000 to 2011. Patient demographics, mechanism, and location of vascular injury and treatment were registered. Injury scores were calculated and overall survival estimated.

RESULTS

There were 62 individuals (mean age 44 years, 79% males) with 95 major vascular traumas, giving an incidence of 1.69/100,000 inhabitants (95% confidence interval: 1.27-2.21). A total of 33 died at the scene and 8 during transportation to hospital but 21 (34%) reached hospital alive. Most patients who succumbed had thoracic major vascular traumas (76%) or abdominal major vascular traumas (23%). Mean new injury severity score for the 21 admitted patients was 44. A total of 18 were operated with vascular repair, 3 with endovascular stent graft insertion. The mean hospital stay for discharged patients was 34 days. Altogether, 15 of the 62 patients (24%) survived to discharge from hospital, with a 5-year survival of 86% for discharged patients.

CONCLUSION

Every other patient with major vascular trauma following traffic accidents died at the scene and a further 13% died during transportation to hospital, most of whom sustained major vascular trauma to the thoracic aorta. However, one-third of the patients reached hospital alive and 71% of them survived to discharge, with excellent long-term survival.

External injuries, trauma and avoidable deaths in Agincourt, South Africa: a retrospective observational and qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Injury burden is highest in low-income and middle-income countries. To reduce avoidable deaths, it is necessary to identify health system deficiencies preventing timely, quality care. We developed criteria to use verbal autopsy (VA) data to identify avoidable deaths and associated health system deficiencies.

SETTING

Agincourt, a rural Bushbuckridge municipality, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa.

PARTICIPANTS

Agincourt Health and Socio-Demographic Surveillance System and healthcare providers (HCPs) from local hospitals.

METHODS

A literature review to explore definitions of avoidable deaths after trauma and barriers to access to care using the 'three delays framework' (seeking, reaching and receiving care) was performed. Based on these definitions, this study developed criteria, applicable for use with VA data, for identifying avoidable death and which of the three delays contributed to avoidable deaths. These criteria were then applied retrospectively to the VA-defined category external injury deaths (EIDs-a subset of which are trauma deaths) from 2012 to 2015. The findings were validated by external expert review. Key informant interviews (KIIs) with HCPs were performed to further explore delays to care.

RESULTS

Using VA data, avoidable death was defined with a focus on survivability, using level of consciousness at the scene and ability to seek care as indicators. Of 260 EIDs (189 trauma deaths), there were 104 (40%) avoidable EIDs and 78 (30%) avoidable trauma deaths (41% of trauma deaths). Delay in receiving care was the largest contributor to avoidable EIDs (61%) and trauma deaths (59%), followed by delay in seeking care (24% and 23%) and in reaching care (15% and 18%). KIIs revealed context-specific factors contributing to the third delay, including difficult referral systems.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of EIDs and trauma deaths were avoidable, mainly occurring due to facility-based delays in care. Interventions, including strengthening referral networks, may substantially reduce trauma deaths.

Potentially preventable trauma deaths: A retrospective review

BACKGROUND

Reviewing prehospital trauma deaths provides an opportunity to identify system improvements that may reduce trauma mortality. The objective of this study was to identify the number and rate of potentially preventable trauma deaths through expert panel reviews of prehospital and early in-hospital trauma deaths.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of prehospital and early in-hospital (<24 h) trauma deaths following a traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest that were attended by Ambulance Victoria (AV) in the state of Victoria, Australia, between 2008 and 2014. Expert panels were used to review cases that had resuscitation attempted by paramedics and underwent a full autopsy. Patients with a mechanism of hanging, drowning or those with anatomical injuries deemed to be unsurvivable were excluded.

RESULTS

Of the 1183 cases that underwent full autopsies, resuscitation was attempted by paramedics in 336 (28%) cases. Of these, 113 cases (34%) were deemed to have potentially survivable injuries and underwent expert panel review. There were 90 (80%) deaths that were not preventable, 19 (17%) potentially preventable deaths and 4 (3%) preventable deaths. Potentially preventable or preventable deaths represented 20% of those cases that underwent review and 7% of cases that had attempted resuscitation.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of potentially preventable or preventable trauma deaths in the pre-hospital and early in-hospital resuscitation phase was low. Specific circumstances were identified in which the trauma system could be further improved.

Prehospital trauma death review in the State of Victoria, Australia: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Regionalised trauma systems have been shown to improve outcomes for trauma patients. However, the evaluation of these trauma systems has been oriented towards in-hospital care. Therefore, the epidemiology and care delivered to the injured patients who died in the prehospital setting remain poorly studied. This study aims to provide an overview of a methodological approach to reviewing trauma deaths in order to assess the preventability, identify areas for improvements in the system of care provided to these patients and evaluate the potential for novel interventions to improve outcomes for seriously injured trauma patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The planned study is a retrospective review of prehospital and early in-hospital (<24 hours) deaths following traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest that were attended by Ambulance Victoria between 2008 and 2014. Eligible patients will be identified from the Victorian Ambulance Cardiac Arrest Registry and linked with the National Coronial Information System. For patients who were transported to hospital, data will be linked the Victoria State Trauma Registry. The project will be undertaken in four phases: (1) survivability assessment; (2) preventability assessment; (3) identification of potential areas for improvement; and (4) identification of potentially useful novel technologies. Survivability assessment will be based on predetermined anatomical injuries considered unsurvivable. For patients with potentially survivable injuries, multidisciplinary expert panel reviews will be conducted to assess the preventability as well as the identification of potential areas for improvement and the utility of novel technologies.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The present study was approved by the Victorian Department of Justice and Regulation HREC (CF/16/272) and the Monash University HREC (CF16/532 - 2016000259). Results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and reports provided to Ambulance Victoria, the Victorian State Trauma Committee and the Victorian State Government Department of Health and Human Services.

Are prehospital deaths from trauma and accidental injury preventable? A direct historical comparison to assess what has changed in two decades

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES

In 1994, Hussain and Redmond revealed that up to 39% of prehospital deaths from accidental injury might have been preventable had basic first aid care been given. Since then there have been significant advances in trauma systems and care. The exclusion of prehospital deaths from the analysis of trauma registries, giv en the high rate of those, is a major limitation in prehospital research on preventable death. We have repeated the 1994 study to identify any changes over the years and potential developments to improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

We examined the full Coroner's inquest files for prehospital deaths from trauma and accidental injury over a three-year period in Cheshire. Injuries were scored using the Abbreviated-Injury-Scale (AIS-1990) and Injury Severity Score (ISS), and probability of survival estimated using Bull's probits to match the original protocol.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-four deaths met our inclusion criteria; 79% were male, average age at death was 53.6 years. Sixty-two were found dead (FD), fifty-eight died at scene (DAS) and fourteen were dead on arrival at hospital (DOA). The predominant mechanism of injury was fall (39%). The median ISS was 29 with 58 deaths (43%) having probability of survival of >50%. Post-mortem evidence of head injury was present in 102 (76%) deaths. A bystander was on scene or present immediately after injury in 45% of cases and prior to the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) in 96%. In 93% of cases a bystander made the call for assistance, in those DAS or DOA, bystander intervention of any kind was 43%.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of potentially preventable prehospital deaths remains high and unchanged. First aid intervention of any kind is infrequent. There is a potentially missed window of opportunity for bystander intervention prior to the arrival of the ambulance service, with simple first-aid manoeuvres to open the airway, preventing hypoxic brain injury and cardiac arrest.

Prehospital deaths from trauma: Are injuries survivable and do bystanders help?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Deaths from trauma occurring in the prehospital phase of care are typically excluded from analysis in trauma registries. A direct historical comparison with Hussain and Redmond's study on preventable prehospital trauma deaths has shown that, two decades on, the number of potentially preventable deaths remains high. Using updated methodology, we aimed to determine the current nature, injury severity and survivability of traumatic prehospital deaths and to ascertain the presence of bystanders and their role following the point of injury including the frequency of first-aid delivery.

METHODS

We examined the Coroners' inquest files for deaths from trauma, occurring in the prehospital phase, over a three-year period in the Cheshire and Manchester (City), subsequently referred to as Manchester, Coronial jurisdictions. Injuries were scored using the Abbreviated-Injury-Scale (AIS-2008), Injury Severity Score (ISS) calculated and probability of survival estimated using the Trauma Audit and Research Network's outcome prediction model.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-eight deaths were included in the study (one hundred and thirty-four Cheshire, forty-four Manchester). The World Health Organisation's recommendations consider those with a probability of survival between 25-50% as potentially preventable and those above 50% as preventable. The median ISS was 29 (Cheshire) and 27.5 (Manchester) with sixty-two (46%) and twenty-six (59%) respectively having a probability of survival in the potentially preventable and preventable ranges. Bystander presence during or immediately after the point of injury was 45% (Cheshire) and 39% (Manchester). Bystander intervention of any kind was 25% and 30% respectively. Excluding those found dead and those with a probability of survival less than 25%, bystanders were present immediately after the point of injury or "within minutes" in thirty-three of thirty-five (94%) Cheshire and ten of twelve (83%) Manchester. First aid of any form was attempted in fourteen of thirty-five (40%) and nine of twelve (75%) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A high number of prehospital deaths from trauma occur with injuries that are potentially survivable, yet first aid intervention is infrequent. Following injury there is a potential window of opportunity for the provision of bystander assistance, particularly in the context of head injury, for simple first-aid manoeuvres to save lives.

We need to include bystander first aid in trauma research

Background

The chain of trauma survival is a concept that originated in the area of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and was adapted to the treatment of trauma. In out-of-hospital cardiac arrest research into bystander first aid has resulted in improved outcome. Whereas, in trauma research the first link of the chain of survival is almost ignored.

Methods

In OHCA, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) from bystanders has been subject of a vast amount of research, as well as measures and programs to raise the rate of bystander CPR to cardiac arrest victims. These efforts have resulted in improved survival. The research effort has been well grounded in the research community, as demonstrated by its natural inclusion in the uniform reporting template (Utstein) for the treatment of OHCA. In trauma the bystander may contribute by providing an open airway, staunch bleedings, or prevent hypothermia. In trauma however, while the chain of survival has been adopted along with it distinct links, including bystander first aid, the consensus-based uniform reporting template for trauma (the Utstein template) does not include the bystander first aid efforts. There is extremely little research on what first aid measures bystanders provide to trauma victims, and on what impact such measures have on outcome. An important step to improve research on bystander first aid in trauma would be to include this as part of the uniform reporting template for trauma

Conclusion

The lack of research on bystander first aid makes the first link in the trauma chain of survival the weakest link. We, the trauma research community, should either improve our research and knowledge in this area, or remove the link from the chain of survival