Using the Red Cross wound classification to predict treatment needs in children with conflict-related limb injuries: a retrospective database study

Perioperative Risk Assessment in Humanitarian Settings: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

No validated perioperative risk assessment models currently exist for use in humanitarian settings. To inform the development of a perioperative mortality risk assessment model applicable to humanitarian settings, we conducted a scoping review of the literature to identify reports that described perioperative risk assessment in surgical care in humanitarian settings and LMICs.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the literature to identify records that described perioperative risk assessment in low-resource or humanitarian settings. Searches were conducted in databases including: PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, World Health Organization Catalog, and Google Scholar.

RESULTS

Our search identified 1582 records. After title/abstract and full text screening, 50 reports remained eligible for analysis in quantitative and qualitative synthesis. These reports presented data from over 37 countries from public, NGO, and military facilities. Data reporting was highly inconsistent: fewer than half of reports presented the indication for surgery; less than 25% of reports presented data on injury severity or prehospital data. Most elements of perioperative risk models designed for high-resource settings (e.g., vital signs, laboratory data, and medical comorbidities) were unavailable.

CONCLUSION

At present, no perioperative mortality risk assessment model exists for use in humanitarian settings. Limitations in consistency and quality of data reporting are a primary barrier, however, can be addressed through data-driven identification of several key variables encompassed by a minimum dataset. The development of such a score is a critical step toward improving the quality of care provided to populations affected by conflict and protracted humanitarian crises.

Borrowing the Features of Biopolymers for Emerging Wound Healing Dressings: A Review

Wound dressing design is a dynamic and rapidly growing field of the medical wound-care market worldwide. Advances in technology have resulted in the development of a wide range of wound dressings that treat different types of wounds by targeting the four phases of healing. The ideal wound dressing should perform rapid healing; preserve the body’s water content; be oxygen permeable, non-adherent on the wound and hypoallergenic; and provide a barrier against external contaminants—at a reasonable cost and with minimal inconvenience to the patient. Therefore, choosing the best dressing should be based on what the wound needs and what the dressing does to achieve complete regeneration and restoration of the skin’s structure and function. Biopolymers, such as alginate (ALG), chitosan (Cs), collagen (Col), hyaluronic acid (HA) and silk fibroin (SF), are extensively used in wound management due to their biocompatibility, biodegradability and similarity to macromolecules recognized by the human body. However, most of the formulations based on biopolymers still show various issues; thus, strategies to combine them with molecular biology approaches represent the future of wound healing. Therefore, this article provides an overview of biopolymers’ roles in wound physiology as a perspective on the development of a new generation of enhanced, naturally inspired, smart wound dressings based on blood products, stem cells and growth factors.

Predicting surgical resource consumption and in-hospital mortality in resource-scarce conflict settings: a retrospective study

Background

In armed conflicts, civilian health care struggles to cope. Being able to predict what resources are needed is therefore vital. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) implemented in the 1990s the Red Cross Wound Score (RCWS) for assessment of penetrating injuries. It is unknown to what extent RCWS or the established trauma scores Kampala trauma Score (KTS) and revised trauma score (RTS) can be used to predict surgical resource consumption and in-hospital mortality in resource-scarce conflict settings.

Methods

A retrospective study of routinely collected data on weapon-injured adults admitted to ICRC’s hospitals in Peshawar, 2009–2012 and Goma, 2012–2014. High resource consumption was defined as ≥3 surgical procedures or ≥ 3 blood-transfusions or amputation. The relationship between RCWS, KTS, RTS and resource consumption, in-hospital mortality was evaluated with logistic regression and adjusted area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). The impact of missing data was assessed with imputation. Model fit was compared with Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).

Results

A total of 1564 patients were included, of these 834 patients had complete data. For high surgical resource consumption AUC was significantly higher for RCWS (0.76, 95% CI 0.74–0.78) than for KTS (0.53, 95% CI 0.50–0.56) and RTS (0.51, 95% CI 0.48–0.54) for all patients. Additionally, RCWS had lower AIC, indicating a better model fit. For in-hospital mortality AUC was significantly higher for RCWS (0.83, 95% CI 0.79–0.88) than for KTS (0.71, 95% CI 0.65–0.76) and RTS (0.70, 95% CI 0.63–0.76) for all patients, but not for patients with complete data.

Conclusion

RCWS appears to predict surgical resource consumption better than KTS and RTS. RCWS may be a promising tool for planning and monitoring surgical care in resource-scarce conflict settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-021-00488-2.

A Comparative Study Between Two Combat Injury Severity Scores

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, specific trauma scoring systems have been developed for military casualties. The objective of this study was to examine the discrepancies in severity scores of combat casualties between the Abbreviated Injury Scale 2005-Military (mAIS) and the Military Combat Injury Scale (MCIS) and a review of the current literature on the application of trauma scoring systems in the military setting.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, descriptive, and retrospective study was conducted between May 1, 2005, and December 31, 2014. The study population consisted of all combat casualties attended in the Spanish Role 2 deployed in Herat (Afghanistan). We used the New Injury Severity Score (NISS) as reference score. Severity of each injury was calculated according to mAIS and MCIS, respectively. The severity of each casualty was calculated according to the NISS based on the mAIS (Military New Injury Severity Score-mNISS) and MCIS (Military Combat Injury Scale-New Injury Severity Score-MCIS-NISS). Casualty severity were grouped by severity levels (mild-scores: 1-8, moderate-scores: 9-15, severe-scores: 16-24, and critical-scores: 25-75).

RESULTS

Nine hundred and eleven casualties were analyzed. Most were male (96.37%) with a median age of 27 years. Afghan patients comprised 71.13%. Air medevac was the main casualty transportation method (80.13). Explosion (64.76%) and gunshot wound (34.68%) mechanisms predominated. Overall mortality was 3.51%. Median mNISS and MCIS-NISS were similar in nonsurvivors (36 [IQR, 25-49] vs. [IQR, 25-48], respectively) but different in survivors, 9 (IQR, 4-17) vs. 5 (IQR, 2-13), respectively (P < .0001). The mNISS and MCIS-NISS were discordant in 34.35% (n = 313). Among cases with discordant severity scores, the median difference between mNISS and MCIS-NISS was 9 (IQR, 4-16); range, 1 to 57.

CONCLUSION

Our study findings suggest that discrepancies in injury severity levels may be observed in one in three of the casualties when using mNISS and MCIS-NISS.