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.

Incidence of persistent opioid use following traumatic injury

INTRODUCTION

Major traumatic injuries are a known risk factor for persistent opioid use, but data describing the relationship between specific traumatic injuries and opioid use is lacking.

METHODS

We used insurance claims data from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2020 to estimate the incidence of new persistent opioid use in three hospitalized trauma populations: individuals hospitalized after burn injury (3809, 1504 of whom required tissue grafting), individuals hospitalized after motor vehicle collision (MVC; 9041), and individuals hospitalized after orthopedic injury (47, 637). New persistent opioid use was defined as receipt of ≥1 opioid prescriptions 90-180 days following injury in an individual with no opioid prescriptions during the year prior to injury.

RESULTS

New persistent opioid use was observed in 12% (267/2305) of individuals hospitalized after burn injury with no grafting, and 12% (176/1504) of burn injury patients requiring tissue grafting. In addition, new persistent opioid use was observed in 16% (1454/9041) of individuals hospitalized after MVC, and 20% (9455/47, 637) of individuals hospitalized after orthopedic trauma. In comparison, rates of persistent opioid use in all trauma cohorts (19%, 11, 352/60, 487) were greater than the rates of persistent opioid use in both non-traumatic major surgery (13%) and non-traumatic minor surgery (9%).

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate that new persistent opioid use frequently occurs in these common hospitalized trauma populations. Improved interventions to reduce persistent pain and opioid use in patients hospitalized after these and other traumas are needed.

Fatal opioid overdoses geospatially cluster with level 1 trauma centers in Ohio

OBJECTIVE

Ohio is consistently ranked as one of the worst states for opioid overdose deaths. Traumatic injury has been linked to opioid overdose deaths, yet the location of trauma centers has not been explored. We examined whether geospatial clustering occurred between county-level opioid overdose deaths (OODs) and trauma center levels.

METHODS

We obtained 2019 county-level data from the Ohio Department of Health for fatal overdoses from prescription opioids. We obtained the total number of opioid doses prescribed in 2019 per county from the Ohio Automated Rx Reporting System and American College of Surgeons designated trauma center locations within Ohio from their website. We used geospatial analysis to assess if clustering occurred between trauma center level and prescription opioid overdose deaths at a county level.

RESULTS

There were 42 trauma centers located within 21 counties: 7 counties had level 1, and 14 counties had only level 2/level 3. There was no difference in rates of opioid doses prescribed per 100,000 people between counties with level 1 trauma centers and only level 2/level 3. However, prescription OODs rates were significantly higher in counties with level 1 trauma centers (37.6 vs 20, P = .02). Geospatial clustering was observed between level 1 trauma centers and prescription opioid overdose deaths at the county level (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Geospatial clustering exists between prescription OODs and level 1 trauma center locations in Ohio. Improved at-risk patient identification and targeted community outreach represent opportunities for trauma providers to tackle the opioid epidemic.

Opioids and Injury Deaths: A population-based analysis of the United States from 2006 to 2017

INTRODUCTION

In the United States, the opioid epidemic claims over 130 lives per day due to overdoses. While the use of opioids in trauma patients has been well-described in the literature, it is unknown whether prescription opioid use is associated with mortality after trauma. We hypothesized that legally obtained prescription opioid consumption would be positively associated with injury-related deaths in the United States.

METHODS

Cross-sectional time-series data was compiled using state-level mortality data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Multiple Causes of Death database and prescription opioid shipping data to each state using the US Department of Justice Automated Reports and Consolidated Ordering System Retail Drug Summary reports from 2006 to 2017, with opioids shipped used as a proxy for local opioid consumption. Oxycodone and hydrocodone amounts were converted to morphine equivalent doses (MEDs). Our primary outcome was an association between MEDs and injury mortality rates at the state-level. We analyzed total injury-related deaths and subgroups of unintentional deaths, suicides, and homicides. We modeled the data using fixed effects regression to reduce bias from unmeasured differences between states.

RESULTS

Data were available for all states and the District of Columbia. Opioid deliveries increased through 2012 and then declined. Total injury-related mortalities have been increasing steadily since 2012. Opioid MEDs did not show a consistent or statistically significant relationship with injury-related mortality, including with any subgroups of unintentional deaths, suicides, and homicides.

CONCLUSION

In every state examined, there was no consistent relationship between the amount of prescription opioids delivered and total injury-related mortality or any subgroups, suggesting that there is not a direct association between prescription opioids and injury-related mortality. This is the first study to combine national mortality and opioid data to investigate the relationship between legally obtained opioids and injury-related mortality. The US opioid epidemic remains a significant challenge that requires ongoing attention from all stakeholders in our medical and public health systems.

Evaluation of Injury Recidivism Using the Electronic Medical Record

BACKGROUND

Traumatic injuries remain one of the leading causes of death in the United States. Patients who survive traumatic injuries but return to the emergency department with repeat injuries are said to suffer from injury recidivism. Numerous studies have described trends in injury recidivism using trauma registry and survey data. To our knowledge, no prior study has leveraged electronic medical record (EMR) data to characterize injury recidivism. The EMR is potentially more comprehensive as it contains details of patients who visited the emergency department after injury but did not meet the criteria for inclusion in the trauma registry. Such injuries could be predictive of future recidivism. We therefore aimed to describe patterns of injury recidivism seen at a Level 1 trauma center using the EMR.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of all injury-related encounters between January 2016 and December 2019. Manual review was conducted of all recidivistic encounters with < 11 months between encounters to ensure the recidivistic encounter was not a sequela of the index visit. A general estimating equation logistic regression adjusted for age, race, sex, and insurance payor, estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between injury mechanism and odds of recidivistic encounter.

RESULTS

A total of 20,566 index encounters was included during the study period. Of the 20,566 encounters, 7.6% (n = 1570) had a recidivistic encounter during the study period, half of which (n = 781) occurred within the first year of the index encounter. An over two-fold increased odds of recidivism was observed for blunt assault encounters (OR 2.53, 95% CI 2.03-3.15) and unintentional falls (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.76-2.52). For both mechanisms, this increase was observed across the three years following the index encounter.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found that patients with assault injuries have the highest odds of injury recidivism and assault-related recidivistic encounters. These results demonstrate the feasibility and utility of incorporating EMR data, and suggest that the development of targeted interventions focused on mitigating assault injuries, such as hospital-based violence intervention programs, should be considered in our region.