Biases in the collection of blood alcohol data for adult major trauma patients in Victoria, Australia

Association between acute pre-injury alcohol use and 12-month health outcomes for survivors of major trauma: A registry-based study

INTRODUCTION

Alcohol is commonly detected in patients presenting to hospital after major trauma and is a key preventable risk factor for injury. While it has been suggested that alcohol intoxication at the time of injury results in worse acute patient outcomes, there is currently limited knowledge on the impact of alcohol on health outcomes following hospital discharge. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between acute pre-injury alcohol exposure and the self-reported health outcomes of survivors of major trauma 12-months post-injury.

METHODS

Data from the Victorian State Trauma Registry (January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2020) were used to identify major trauma patients who: (1) were aged ≥18 years; (2) survived to 12-months post-injury; and (3) had blood alcohol data available in the registry. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine differences in self-reported health status (EQ-5D) and return to work at 12-months post-injury by blood alcohol concentration (BAC) at the time of presentation to hospital. Analyses were adjusted for potential confounders including a range of demographic, hospital and injury characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 2957 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 857 (29.0 %) had a BAC >0 and 690 (23.3 %) had a BAC ≥0.05 g/100 mL. After adjusting for potential confounders, having any alcohol detected (i.e., BAC >0) was associated with lower odds of reporting problems on the EQ-5D mobility (aOR = 0.72, 95 %CI = 0.53 to 0.99) and usual activities dimensions (aOR = 0.79, 95 %CI = 0.63 to 0.99). Having a BAC ≥0.05 g/100 mL was only associated with lower adjusted odds of reporting problems on the usual activities dimension (aOR = 0.69, 95 %CI = 0.55 to 0.88) of the EQ-5D. Alcohol detection was not associated with the self-care, pain/discomfort or anxiety/depression dimensions of the EQ-5D, or with return to work in adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSION

Acute pre-injury alcohol exposure was not associated with increased reporting of problems on the EQ-5D or with return to work at 12-months post-injury. Further research is needed to understand why patients with alcohol detections were sometimes associated with paradoxically better 12-month post-injury outcomes relative to patients without alcohol detections.

Approaches and reporting of alcohol and other drug testing for injured patients in hospital-based studies: A systematic review

ISSUE

Hospital alcohol and/or other drug (AOD) testing is important for identifying AOD-related injuries; however, testing methods vary. This systematic review aimed to examine biological AOD testing methods from hospital-based studies of injured patients and quantify what proportion reported key information on those testing methods.

APPROACH

Observational studies published in English from 2010 onwards involving biological AOD testing for injured patients presenting to hospital were included. Studies examining single injury causes were excluded. Extracted data included concentration thresholds for AOD detection (e.g., lower limits of detection, author-defined cut-offs), test type (e.g., immunoassay, breathalyser) and approach (e.g., routine, clinical discretion), timing of testing, sample type and the proportion of injured cases tested for AODs.

KEY FINDINGS

Of 83 included studies, 76 measured alcohol and 37 other drugs. Forty-nine studies defined blood alcohol concentration thresholds (ranging from 0 to 0.1 g/100 mL). Seven studies defined concentration thresholds for other drugs. Testing approach was reported in 39/76 alcohol and 18/37 other drug studies. Sample type was commonly reported (alcohol: n = 69/76; other drugs: n = 28/37); alcohol was typically measured using blood (n = 60) and other drugs using urine (n = 20). Studies that reported the proportion of cases tested (alcohol: n = 53/76; other drugs: n = 28/37), reported that between 0% and 89% of cases were not tested for alcohol and 0% and 91% for other drugs. Timing of testing was often unreported (alcohol: n = 61; other drugs: n = 30).

IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION

Variation in AOD testing methods alongside incomplete reporting of those methods limits data comparability and interpretation. Standardised reporting of testing methods will assist AOD-related injury surveillance and prevention.