Predictors of transfusion in trauma and their utility in the prehospital environment: a scoping review

Background: Hemorrhage is a leading cause of preventable mortality from trauma, necessitating resuscitation through blood product transfusions. Early and accurate identification of patients requiring transfusions in the prehospital setting may reduce delays in time to transfusion upon arrival to hospital, reducing mortality. The purpose of this study is to characterize existing literature on predictors of transfusion and analyze their utility in the prehospital context.Objectives: The objectives of this study are to characterize the existing quantity and quality of literature regarding predictor scores for transfusion in injured patients, and to analyse the utility of predictor scores for massive transfusions in the prehospital setting and identify prehospital predictor scores for future research.Methods: A search strategy was developed in consultation with information specialists. A literature search of OVID MEDLINE from 1946 to present was conducted for primary studies evaluating the predictive ability of scoring systems or single variables in predicting transfusion in all trauma settings.Results: Of the 5824 studies were identified, 5784 studies underwent title and abstract screening, 94 studies underwent full text review, and 72 studies were included in the final review. We identified 16 single variables and 52 scoring systems for predicting transfusion. Amongst single predictor variables, fluids administered and systolic blood pressure had the highest reported sensitivity (100%) and specificity (89%) for massive transfusion protocol (MTP) activation respectively. Amongst scoring systems for transfusion, the Shock Index and Modified Shock Index had the highest reported sensitivity (96%), while the Pre-arrival Model had the highest reported specificity (95%) for MTP activation. Overall, 20 scores were identified as being applicable to the prehospital setting, 25 scores were identified as being potentially applicable, and seven scores were identified as being not applicable.Conclusions: We identified an extensive list of predictive single variables, validated scoring systems, and derived models for massive transfusion, presented their properties, and identified those with potential utility in the prehospital setting. By further validating applicable scoring tools in the prehospital setting, we may begin to administer more timely transfusions in the trauma population.

Systematic reviews of scores and predictors to trigger activation of massive transfusion protocols

BACKGROUND

The use of massive transfusion protocols (MTPs) in the resuscitation of hemorrhaging trauma patients ensures rapid delivery of blood products to improve outcomes, where the decision to trigger MTPs early is important. Scores and tools to predict the need for MTP activation have been developed for use to aid with clinical judgment. We performed a systematic review to assess (1) the scores and tools available to predict MTP in trauma patients, (2) their clinical value and diagnostic accuracies, and (3) additional predictors of MTP.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to June 2017. All studies that utilized scores or predictors of MTP activation in adult (age, ≥18 years) trauma patients were included. Data collection for scores and tools included reported sensitivities and specificities and accuracy as defined by the area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic.

RESULTS

Forty-five articles were eligible for analysis, with 11 validated and four unvalidated scores and tools assessed. Of four scores using clinical assessment, laboratory values, and ultrasound assessment the modified Traumatic Bleeding Severity Score had the best performance. Of those scores, the Trauma Associated Severe Hemorrhage score is most well validated and has higher area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic than the Assessment of Blood Consumption and Prince of Wales scores. Without laboratory results, the Assessment of Blood Consumption score balances accuracy with ease of use. Without ultrasound use, the Vandromme and Schreiber scores have the highest accuracy and sensitivity respectively. The Shock Index uses clinical assessment only with fair performance. Other clinical variables, laboratory values, and use of point-of-care testing results were identified predictors of MTP activation.

CONCLUSION

The use of scores or tools to predict MTP need to be individualized to hospital resources and skill set to aid clinical judgment. Future studies for triggering nontrauma MTP activations are needed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review, level III.