Evaluation of elderly specific pre-hospital trauma triage criteria: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pre-hospital identification of major trauma in elderly patients is key for delivery of optimal care, however triage of this group is challenging. Elderly-specific triage criteria may be valuable. This systematic review aimed to summarise the published pre-hospital elderly-specific trauma triage tools and evaluate their sensitivity and specificity and associated clinical outcomes.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched using predetermined criteria (PROSPERO: CRD42019140879). Two authors independently assessed search results, performed data extraction, risk of bias and quality assessments following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

RESULTS

801 articles were screened and 11 studies met eligibility criteria, including 1,332,300 patients from exclusively USA populations. There were eight unique elderly-specific triage criteria reported. Most studies retrospectively applied criteria to trauma databases, with few reporting real-world application. The Ohio Geriatric Triage Criteria was reported in three studies. Age cut-off ranged from 55 to 70 years with ≥ 65 most frequently reported. All reported existing adult criteria with modified physiological parameters using higher thresholds for systolic blood pressure and Glasgow coma scale, although the values used varied. Three criteria added co-morbidity or anti-coagulant/anti-platelet use considerations. Modifications to anatomical or mechanism of injury factors were used by only one triage criteria. Criteria sensitivity ranged from 44 to 93%, with a median of 86.3%, whilst specificity was generally poor (median 54%). Scant real-world data showed an increase in patients meeting triage criteria, but minimal changes to patient transport destination and mortality. All studies were at risk of bias and assessed of "very low" or "low" quality.

CONCLUSIONS

There are several published elderly-specific pre-hospital trauma triage tools in clinical practice, all developed and employed in the USA. Consensus exists for higher thresholds for physiological parameters, however there was variability in age-cut offs, triage criteria content, and tool sensitivity and specificity. Although sensitivity was improved over corresponding 'adult' criteria, specificity remained poor. There is a paucity of published real-world data examining the effect on patient care and clinical outcomes of elderly-specific triage criteria. There is uncertainty over the optimal elderly triage tool and further study is required to better inform practice and improve patient outcomes.

The growing challenge of major trauma in older people: a role for comprehensive geriatric assessment?

In this commentary article, we describe the impact that an ageing population is having on the nature of major trauma seen in emergency departments. The proportion of major trauma victims who are older people is rapidly increasing and a fall from standing is now the most common mechanism of injury in major trauma. Potential barriers to effective care of this patient group are highlighted, including: a lack of consensus regarding triage criteria; potentially misleading physiological parameters within triage criteria; non-linear patient presentations and diagnostic nihilism. We argue that the complex ongoing care and rehabilitation needs of older patients with major trauma may be best met through Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA). Furthermore, the use of frailty screening tools may facilitate more informed early decision-making in relation to treatment interventions in older trauma victims. We call for geriatric medicine and emergency medicine departments to collaborate-equipping urgent care staff with the basic competencies necessary to initiate CGA should be a priority, and geriatricians have a key role to play in delivery of such educational interventions.

Preparation of the trauma response in a UK emergency department

An immediate, effective team response is needed in order to properly cater to the needs of trauma patients. This paper aims to review some of the strategies that can be implemented in Emergency Departments to reduce errors and improve decision-making in major trauma. It focuses on the phase prior to the patient’s arrival, and in the first few minutes afterwards – as there is evidence that an organised response at this point creates the ideal conditions for all subsequent activity, such as transfer of the patient for further imaging and the requirement for emergency surgery.

Nine out of ten trauma calls to a Norwegian hospital are avoidable: a retrospective analysis

Background

Our aim was to estimate the degree of overtriage (Injury Severity Score [ISS] ≤ 15) of trauma call patients in Nordland Hospital Bodø, Norway. We also determined the transportation time from injury to hospital admission.

Methods

We used data from our Acute Medical Information System, ambulance records and patient charts relating to ISS and estimation of response and transport times. Data were collected for all trauma call patients in the period from the establishment of the trauma call system in June 2008 until the 31st of December 2010.

Results

We identified 421 out of 458 possible trauma call patients with sufficient clinical information available for ISS scoring. Of these 385 had an ISS ≤15. Overtriage was 91.5% (95% CI: 88.8%–94.2%). Median time from injury to the arrival of transport, and from injury to arrival in hospital, was 36 minutes and 1 hour 27 minutes, respectively.

Conclusions

To our knowledge 91.5% is the highest overtriage ever published. There is a need for narrowing the trauma call criteria. This could be achieved by implementing clinical observations during the long transportation time.

Triaging the right patient to the right place in the shortest time

Trauma systems have been successful in saving lives and preventing disability. Making sure that the right patient gets the right treatment in the shortest possible time is integral to this success. Most trauma systems have not fully developed trauma triage to optimize outcomes. For trauma triage to be effective, there must be a well-developed pre-hospital system with an efficient dispatch system and adequately resourced ambulance system. Hospitals must have clear designations of the level of service provided and agreed protocols for reception of patients. The response within the hospital must be targeted to ensure the sickest patients get an immediate response. To enable the most appropriate response to trauma patients across the system, a well-developed monitoring programme must be in place to ensure constant refinement of the clinical response. This article gives a brief overview of the current approach to triaging trauma from time of dispatch to definitive treatment.

An evaluation of the use of a two-tiered trauma team activation system in a UK major trauma centre

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND

Appropriate activation of multidisciplinary trauma teams improves outcome for severely injured patients but can disrupt normal service in the rest of the hospital. Derriford Hospital uses a two-tiered trauma team activation system. The emergency department trauma team (EDTT) is activated in response to a significant traumatic mechanism; the hospital trauma team (HTT) is activated when this mechanism coexists with physiological abnormality or specific anatomical injury. The aim of this study was to compare characteristics, process measures and outcomes between patients treated by EDTTs or HTTs to evaluate the approach in a UK setting.

METHODS

A retrospective database review was performed using Trauma Audit Research Network (TARN) and the local source trauma database. Patients who activated a trauma team between 1 April and 30 September 2012 were included. Patients were categorised according to the type of trauma team activated. Data included time to X-rays, time to CT, time to intubation, numbers discharged from ED, intensive care unit admission, injury severity score and mortality.

RESULTS

During the study period, 456 patients activated a trauma team with 358 EDTT and 98 HTT activations. Patients seen by the ED team were significantly less likely to have severe injury or require hospital admission, intubation, emergency operation or blood transfusion. Differences in time taken to key investigations were statistically but not clinically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

A two-tiered trauma team activation system is an efficient and cost-effective way of dealing with trauma patients presenting to a major trauma centre in the UK.