Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations in Pediatric Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Our primary objectives were to identify clinical practice guideline recommendations for children with acute mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) presenting to an emergency department (ED), appraise their overall quality, and synthesize the quality of evidence and the strength of included recommendations.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, and medical association websites from January 2012 to May 2023 for clinical practice guidelines with at least 1 recommendation targeting pediatric mTBI populations presenting to the ED within 48 hours of injury for any diagnostic or therapeutic intervention in the acute phase of care (ED and inhospital). Pairs of reviewers independently assessed overall clinical practice guideline quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. The quality of evidence on recommendations was synthesized using a matrix based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence-to-Decision framework.

RESULTS

We included 11 clinical practice guidelines, of which 6 (55%) were rated high quality. These included 101 recommendations, of which 34 (34%) were based on moderate- to high-quality evidence, covering initial assessment, initial diagnostic imaging, monitoring/observation, therapeutic interventions, discharge advice, follow-up, and patient and family support. We did not identify any evidence-based recommendations in high-quality clinical practice guidelines for repeat imaging, neurosurgical consultation, or hospital admission. Lack of strategies and tools to aid implementation and editorial independence were the most common methodological weaknesses.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 34 recommendations based on moderate- to high-quality evidence that may be considered for implementation in clinical settings. Our review highlights important areas for future research. This review also underlines the importance of providing strategies to facilitate the implementation of clinical practice guideline recommendations for pediatric mTBI.

Social determinants of health and disparities in pediatric trauma care: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Social determinants of health (SDH), including "the conditions in which individuals are born, grow, work, live and age" affect child health and well-being. Several studies have synthesized evidence about the influence of SDH on childhood injury risks and outcomes. However, there is no systematic evidence about the impact of SDH on accessing care and quality of care once a child has suffered an injury. We aim to evaluate the extent to which access to care and quality of care after injury are affected by children and adolescents' SDH.

METHODS

Using Cochrane methodology, we will conduct a systematic review including observational and experimental studies evaluating the association between social/material elements contributing to health disparities, using the PROGRESS-Plus framework: place of residence, race/ethnicity/culture/language, occupation, gender/sex, religion, education, socioeconomic status, and social capital and care received by children and adolescents (≤ 19 years of age) after injury. We will consult published literature using PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Academic Search Premier and grey literature using Google Scholar from their inception to a maximum of 6 months prior to submission for publication. Two reviewers will independently perform study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment for included studies. The risk of bias will be assessed using the ROBINS-E and ROB-2 tools respectively for observational and experimental study designs. We will analyze data to perform narrative syntheses, and if enough studies are identified, we will conduct a meta-analysis using random effects models.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review will provide a synthesis of evidence on the association between SDH and pediatric trauma care (access to care and quality of care) that clinicians and policymakers can use to better tailor care systems and promote equitable access and quality of care for all children. We will share our findings through clinical rounds, conferences, and publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023408467.

Lack of association between four biomarkers and persistent post-concussion symptoms after a mild traumatic brain injury

Approximately 15 % of individuals who sustained a mild Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) develop persistent post-concussion symptoms (PPCS). We hypothesized that blood biomarkers drawn in the Emergency Department (ED) could help predict PPCS. The main objective of this project was to measure the association between four biomarkers and PPCS at 90 days post mild TBI. We conducted a prospective cohort study in seven Canadian EDs. Patients aged ≥ 14 years presenting to the ED within 24 h of a mild TBI who were discharged were eligible. Clinical data and blood samples were collected in the ED, and a standardized questionnaire was administered 90 days later to assess the presence of symptoms. The following biomarkers were analyzed: S100B protein, Neuron Specific Enolase (NSE), cleaved-Tau (c-Tau) and Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein (GFAP). The primary outcome measure was the presence of PPCS at 90 days after trauma. Relative risks and Areas Under the Curve (AUC) were computed. A total of 595 patients were included, and 13.8 % suffered from PPCS at 90 days. The relative risk of PPCS was 0.9 (95 % CI: 0.5-1.8) for S100B ≥ 20 pg/mL, 1.0 (95 % CI: 0.6-1.5) for NSE ≥ 200 pg/mL, 3.4 (95 % CI: 0.5-23.4) for GFAP ≥ 100 pg/mL, and 1.0 (95 % CI: 0.6-1.8) for C-Tau ≥ 1500 pg/mL. AUC were 0.50, 0.50, 0.51 and 0.54, respectively. Among mild TBI patients, S100B protein, NSE, c-Tau or GFAP do not seem to predict PPCS. Future research testing of other biomarkers is needed to determine their usefulness in predicting PPCS.

Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations For Pediatric Multisystem Trauma Care: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for pediatric multisystem trauma, appraise their quality, synthesize the strength of recommendations and quality of evidence, and identify knowledge gaps.

BACKGROUND

Traumatic injuries are the leading cause of death and disability in children, who require a specific approach to injury care. Difficulties integrating CPG recommendations may cause observed practice and outcome variation in pediatric trauma care.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review using Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials, and grey literature, from January 2007 to November 2022. We included CPGs targeting pediatric multisystem trauma with recommendations on any acute care diagnostic or therapeutic interventions. Pairs of reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of CPGs using "Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation II."

RESULTS

We reviewed 19 CPGs, and 11 were considered high quality. Lack of stakeholder engagement and implementation strategies were weaknesses in guideline development. We extracted 64 recommendations: 6 (9%) on trauma readiness and patient transfer, 24 (38%) on resuscitation, 22 (34%) on diagnostic imaging, 3 (5%) on pain management, 6 (9%) on ongoing inpatient care, and 3 (5%) on patient and family support. Forty-two (66%) recommendations were strong or moderate, but only 5 (8%) were based on high-quality evidence. We did not identify recommendations on trauma survey assessment, spinal motion restriction, inpatient rehabilitation, mental health management, or discharge planning.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 5 recommendations for pediatric multisystem trauma with high-quality evidence. Organizations could improve CPGs by engaging all relevant stakeholders and considering barriers to implementation. There is a need for robust pediatric trauma research, to support recommendations.

Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations in Pediatric Orthopaedic Injury: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Lack of adherence to recommendations on pediatric orthopaedic injury care may be driven by lack of knowledge of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), heterogeneity in recommendations or concerns about their quality. We aimed to identify CPGs for pediatric orthopaedic injury care, appraise their quality, and synthesize the quality of evidence and the strength of associated recommendations.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science and websites of clinical organizations. CPGs including at least one recommendation targeting pediatric orthopaedic injury populations on any diagnostic or therapeutic intervention developed in the last 15 years were eligible. Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data and evaluated CPG quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. We synthesized recommendations from high-quality CPGs using a recommendations matrix based on the GRADE Evidence-to-Decision framework.

RESULTS

We included 13 eligible CPGs, of which 7 were rated high quality. Lack of stakeholder involvement and applicability (i.e., implementation strategies) were identified as weaknesses. We extracted 53 recommendations of which 19 were based on moderate or high-quality evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide a synthesis of recommendations from high-quality CPGs that can be used by clinicians to guide treatment decisions. Future CPGs should aim to use a partnership approach with all key stakeholders and provide strategies to facilitate implementation. This study also highlights the need for more rigorous research on pediatric orthopaedic trauma.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II-therapeutic study.

Pediatric Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the leading cause of death and disability in children. Many clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have addressed pediatric TBI in the last decade but significant variability in the use of these guidelines persists. Here, we systematically review CPGs recommendations for pediatric moderate-to-severe TBI, evaluate the quality of CPGs, synthesize the quality of evidence and strength of included recommendations, and identify knowledge gaps. A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE®, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Web sites of organizations publishing recommendations on pediatric injury care. We included CPGs developed in high-income countries from January 2012 to May 2023, with at least one recommendation targeting pediatric (≤ 19 years old) moderate-to-severe TBI populations. The quality of included clinical practice guidelines was assessed using the AGREE II tool. We synthesized evidence on recommendations using a matrix based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. We identified 15 CPGs of which 9 were rated moderate to high quality using AGREE II. We identified 90 recommendations, of which 40 (45%) were evidence based. Eleven of these were based on moderate to high quality evidence and were graded as moderate or strong by at least one guideline. These included transfer, imaging, intracranial pressure control, and discharge advice. We identified gaps in evidence-based recommendations for red blood cell transfusion, plasma and platelet transfusion, thromboprophylaxis, surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis, early diagnosis of hypopituitarism, and mental health mangement. Many up-to-date CPGs are available, but there is a paucity of evidence to support recommendations, highlighting the urgent need for robust clinical research in this vulnerable population. Our results may be used by clinicians to identify recommendations based on the highest level of evidence, by healthcare administrators to inform guideline implementation in clinical settings, by researchers to identify areas where robust evidence is needed, and by guideline writing groups to inform the updating of existing guidelines or the development of new ones.

Pediatric vs Adult or Mixed Trauma Centers in Children Admitted to Hospitals Following Trauma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Adult trauma centers (ATCs) have been shown to decrease injury mortality and morbidity in major trauma, but a synthesis of evidence for pediatric trauma centers (PTCs) is lacking.

Objective

To assess the effectiveness of PTCs compared with ATCs, combined trauma centers (CTCs), or nondesignated hospitals in reducing mortality and morbidity among children admitted to hospitals following trauma.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science through March 2023.

Study Selection

Studies comparing PTCs with ATCs, CTCs, or nondesignated hospitals for pediatric trauma populations (aged ≤19 years).

Data Extraction and Synthesis

This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data and evaluated risk of bias using the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tool. A meta-analysis was conducted if more than 2 studies evaluated the same intervention-comparator-outcome and controlled minimally for age and injury severity. Subgroup analyses were planned for age, injury type and severity, trauma center designation level and verification body, country, and year of conduct. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess certainty of evidence.

Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s)

Primary outcomes were mortality, complications, functional status, discharge destination, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes were resource use and processes of care, including computed tomography (CT) and operative management of blunt solid organ injury (SOI).

Results

A total of 56 studies with 286 051 participants were included overall, and 34 were included in the meta-analysis. When compared with ATCs, PTCs were associated with a 41% lower risk of mortality (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.46-0.76), a 52% lower risk of CT use (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.26-0.89) and a 64% lower risk of operative management for blunt SOI (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.23-0.57). The OR for complications was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.41-1.56). There was no association for mortality for older children (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.47-1.06), and the association was closer to the null when PTCs were compared with CTCs (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.53-0.99). Results remained similar for other subgroup analyses. GRADE certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, results suggested that PTCs were associated with lower odds of mortality, CT use, and operative management for SOI than ATCs for children admitted to hospitals following trauma, but certainty of evidence was very low. Future studies should strive to address selection and confounding biases.

Clinical practice guideline recommendations for pediatric solid organ injury care: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Observed variations in the management of pediatric solid organ injuries (SOIs) may be due to difficulty in finding and integrating recommendations from multiple clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) with heterogeneous methodological approaches. We aimed to systematically review CPG recommendations for pediatric SOIs.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of CPGs including at least one recommendation targeting pediatric SOI populations, using Medical Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Web of Science, and websites of clinical organizations. Pairs of reviewers independently assessed eligibility, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II tool. We synthesized recommendations from moderate to high-quality CPGs using a recommendations matrix based on Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria.

RESULTS

We identified eight CPGs, including three rated moderate or high quality. Methodological weaknesses included lack of stakeholder involvement beyond surgeons, consideration of applicability (e.g., implementation tools), and clarity around the definition of pediatric populations. Five of the 15 recommendations from moderate to high-quality CPGs were based on moderate quality evidence or were rated as strong; these reflected nonoperative management and angioembolization for renal injuries and required length of stay for liver and spleen injuries.

CONCLUSION

We identified 15 recommendations on pediatric SOI management from 3 moderate or high-quality CPGs, but only one third were based on at least moderate-quality evidence or were rated as strong. Our results prompt the following recommendations for future CPG development or updates: (1) include all types of clinicians involved in the care of pediatric SOIs and patient and family representatives in the process, (2) develop clear definitions of the target population, and (3) provide advice and tools to promote implementation. Results also underline the urgent need for more rigorous research to support strong evidence-based recommendations in this population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Review/Meta-analysis; Level III.

Injury outcomes across Canadian trauma systems: a historical cohort study

PURPOSE

Most North American trauma systems have designated trauma centres (TCs) including level I (ultraspecialized high-volume metropolitan centres), level II (specialized medium-volume urban centres), and/or level III (semirural or rural centres). Trauma system configuration varies across provinces and it is unclear how these differences influence patient distributions and outcomes. We aimed to compare patient case mix, case volumes, and risk-adjusted outcomes of adults with major trauma admitted to designated level I, II, and III TCs across Canadian trauma systems.

METHODS

In a national historical cohort study, we extracted data from Canadian provincial trauma registries on major trauma patients treated between 2013 and 2018 in all designated level I, II, or III TCs in British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Nova Scotia; level I and II TCs in New Brunswick; and four TCs in Ontario. We used multilevel generalized linear models to compare mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission and competitive risk models for hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS). Ontario could not be included in outcome comparisons because there were no population-based data from this province.

RESULTS

The study sample comprised 50,959 patients. Patient distributions in level I and II TCs were similar across provinces but we observed significant differences in case mix and volumes for level III TCs. There was low variation in risk-adjusted mortality and LOS across provinces and TCs but interprovincial and intercentre variation in risk-adjusted ICU admission was high.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that differences in the functional role of TCs according to their designation level across provinces leads to significant variations in the distribution of patients, case volumes, resource use, and clinical outcomes. These results highlight opportunities to improve Canadian trauma care and underline the need for standardized population-based injury data to support national quality improvement efforts.

Performance of a provincial prehospital trauma triage protocol: A retrospective audit

Objective

To assess the accuracy of a five-step prehospital trauma triage protocol ( Échelle québécoise de triage préhospitalier en traumatologie (EQTPT)) to identify patients requiring urgent and specialized in-hospital trauma care in the Capitale-Nationale region – Québec.

Methods

The medical records of trauma patients transported by ambulance to one of the five participating emergency departments (EDs) between November 2016 and March 2017 were reviewed. Our primary outcome was the need for one of the following urgent and specialized trauma care: endotracheal intubation in the ED, administration of ≥ 2 blood products in the ED, angioembolization or surgery (excluding single limb surgery) < 24 h and admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) or in-hospital trauma-related death.

Results

A total of 902 patients were included. The median age was 63 (interquartile range (IQR) 51) and 494 (54.8%) were female. The main trauma mechanism was falls (n = 592), followed by motor vehicle accidents (n = 201). Eighty-two (9.1%) patients required at least one urgent and specialized trauma care. Of those, 44 (53.6%) were identified as requiring transport to a level one trauma centre (steps 1–3), 16 were identified as requiring transport to a centre with a lower level of trauma designation (steps 4–5) while 22 (26.8%) did not meet any of the EQTPT criteria. For steps 1 to 3, the sensitivity was 53.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 42.9–64.4) and the specificity was 81.7% (95% CI 79.1–84.4) in identifying patients requiring specialized trauma care.

Conclusion

The EQTPT lacked sensitivity and was poorly specific to identify trauma patients who need specialized in-hospital trauma care.

Comparison of trauma care structures, processes and outcomes between the English National Health Service and Quebec, Canada

BACKGROUND

Comparisons across trauma systems are key to identifying opportunities to improve trauma care. We aimed to compare trauma service structures, processes and outcomes between the English National Health Service (NHS) and the province of Quebec, Canada.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre cohort study including admissions of patients aged older than 15 years with major trauma to major trauma centres (MTCs) from 2014/15 to 2016/17. We compared structures descriptively, and time to MTC and time in the emergency department (ED) using Wilcoxon tests. We compared mortality, and hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) using multilevel logistic regression with propensity score adjustment, stratified by body region of the worst injury.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 36 337 patients from the NHS and 6484 patients from Quebec. Structural differences in the NHS included advanced prehospital medical teams (v. "scoop and run" in Quebec), helicopter transport (v. fixed-wing aircraft) and trauma team leaders. The median time to an MTC was shorter in Quebec than in the NHS for direct transports (1 h v. 1.5 h, p < 0.001) but longer for transfers (2.5 h v. 6 h, p < 0.001). Time in the ED was longer in Quebec than in the NHS (6.5 h v. 4.0 h, p < 0.001). The adjusted odds of death were higher in Quebec for head injury (odds ratio [OR] 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.51) but lower for thoracoabdominal injuries (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52-0.90). The adjusted median hospital LOS was longer for spine, torso and extremity injuries in the NHS than in Quebec, and the median ICU LOS was longer for spine injuries.

CONCLUSION

We observed significant differences in the structure of trauma care, delays in access and risk-adjusted outcomes between Quebec and the NHS. Future research should assess associations between structures, processes and outcomes to identify opportunities for quality improvement.

Effect of Intermittent Pneumatic Compression in Addition to Pharmacologic Prophylaxis for Thromboprophylaxis in Hospitalized Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) are frequent complications in hospitalized patients and a leading cause of preventable death in hospital. Pharmacologic prophylaxis is a standard of care to prevent VTE in patients at risk, the additional value of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) is uncertain. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of adding IPC to pharmacologic prophylaxis to prevent VTE in hospitalized adults.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to July 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials comparing the use of IPC in addition to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alone in hospitalized adults.

DATA EXTRACTION

Meta-analyses were performed to calculate risk ratio (RR) of VTE, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials, Version 2 and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 17 trials enrolling 8,796 participants. The IPC was mostly applied up to the thigh and pharmacological thromboprophylaxis was primarily low-molecular-weight heparin. Adjunctive IPC was associated with a decreased risk of VTE (15 trials, RR = 0.53; 95% CI [0.35-0.81]) and DVT (14 trials, RR = 0.52; 95% CI [0.33-0.81]) but not PE (seven trials, RR = 0.73; 95% CI [0.32-1.68]). The quality of evidence was graded low, downgraded by risk of bias and inconsistency. Moderate and very low-quality evidence, respectively, suggests that adjunctive IPC is unlikely to change the risk of all-cause mortality or adverse events. Subgroup analyses indicate a more evident apparent benefit in industry-funded trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate low-quality evidence underpinning the additional use of IPC to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for prevention of VTE and DVT. Further large high-quality randomized trials are warranted to support its use and to identify patient subgroups for whom it could be beneficial.

Post-Concussion Symptoms Rule: Derivation and Validation of a Clinical Decision Rule for Early Prediction of Persistent Symptoms after a Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is a common problem. Depending on diagnostic criteria, 13 to 62% of those patients develop persistent post-concussion symptoms (PPCS). The main objective of this prospective multi-center study is to derive and validate a clinical decision rule (CDR) for the early prediction of PPCS. Patients aged ≥14 years were included if they presented to one of our seven participating emergency departments (EDs) within 24 h of an mTBI. Clinical data were collected in the ED, and symptom evolution was assessed at 7, 30 and 90 days post-injury using the Rivermead Post-Concussion Questionnaire (RPQ). The primary outcome was PPCS at 90 days after mTBI. A predictive model called the Post-Concussion Symptoms Rule (PoCS Rule) was developed using the methodological standards for CDR. Of the 1083 analyzed patients (471 and 612 for the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively), 15.6% had PPCS. The final model included the following factors assessed in the ED: age, sex, history of prior TBI or mental health disorder, headache in ED, cervical sprain and hemorrhage on computed tomography. The 7-day follow-up identified additional risk factors: headaches, sleep disturbance, fatigue, sensitivity to light, and RPQ ≥21. The PoCS Rule had a sensitivity of 91.4% and 89.6%, a specificity of 53.8% and 44.7% and a negative predictive value of 97.2% and 95.8% in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. The PoCS Rule will help emergency physicians quickly stratify the risk of PPCS in mTBI patients and better plan post-discharge resources.

Validation of Quality Indicators Targeting Low-Value Trauma Care

Importance

Reducing low-value care has the potential to improve patient experiences and outcomes and free up health care resources. Sixteen quality indicators were recently developed targeting reductions in low-value trauma care based on a synthesis of the best available evidence, expert consensus, and patient preferences.

Objective

To assess the validity of quality indicators on low-value trauma care using trauma registry data.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Data from an inclusive Canadian provincial trauma system were used in this analysis. Included were all admissions for injury to any of the 57 provincial adult trauma centers between April 1, 2013, and March 31, 2020. Metrics for quality indicators were developed iteratively with clinical experts.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Validity was assessed using a priori criteria based on 5 parameters: frequency (incidence and case volume), discrimination (interhospital variation), construct validity (correlation with quality indicators on high-value care), predictive validity (correlation with quality indicators on risk-adjusted outcomes), and forecasting (correlation over time).

Results

The study sample included 136 783 patient admissions (mean [SD] age, 63 [22] years; 68 428 men [50%]). Metrics were developed for 12 of the 16 quality indicators. Six quality indicators showed moderate or high validity on all measurable parameters: initial head, cervical spine, or whole-body computed tomography for low-risk patients; posttransfer repeated computed tomography; neurosurgical consultation for mild complicated traumatic brain injury; and spine service consultation for isolated thoracolumbar process fractures. Red blood cell transfusion in low-risk patients had low frequency but had moderate or high validity on all other parameters. Five quality indicators had low validity on at least 2 parameters: repeated head CT and intensive care unit admission for mild complicated traumatic brain injury, hospital admission for minor blunt abdominal trauma, orthosis for thoracolumbar burst fractures, and surgical exploration in penetrating neck injury without hard signs.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study shows the feasibility of assessing low-value trauma care using routinely collected data. It provided data on quality indicators properties that can be used to decide which quality indicators are most appropriate in a given system. Results suggest that 6 quality indicators have moderate to high validity. Their implementation now needs to be tested.

Economic evaluations of audit and feedback interventions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of audit and feedback (A&F) interventions to improve compliance to healthcare guidelines is supported by randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs. However, there is currently a knowledge gap on their cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess whether A&F interventions targeting improvements in compliance to recommended care are economically favourable.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review including experimental, observational and simulation-based economic evaluation studies of A&F interventions targeting healthcare providers. Comparators were a 'do nothing' strategy, or any other intervention not involving A&F or involving a subset of A&F intervention components. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Econlit, EMBASE, Health Technology Assessment Database, MEDLINE, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, ABI/INFORM, Web of Science, ProQuest and websites of healthcare quality associations to December 2021. Outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, incremental cost-utility ratios, incremental net benefit and incremental cost-benefit ratios. Pairs of reviewers independently selected eligible studies and extracted relevant data. Reporting quality was evaluated using CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards). Results were synthesised using permutation matrices for all studies and predefined subgroups.

RESULTS

Of 13 221 unique citations, 35 studies met our inclusion criteria. The A&F intervention was dominant (ie, at least as effective with lower cost) in 7 studies, potentially cost-effective in 26 and was dominated (ie, the same or less effectiveness and higher costs) in 2 studies. A&F interventions were more likely to be economically favourable in studies based on health outcomes rather than compliance to recommended practice, considering medical costs in addition to intervention costs, published since 2010, and with high reporting quality.

DISCUSSION

Results suggest that A&F interventions may have a high potential to be cost-effective. However, as is common in systematic reviews of economic evaluations, publication bias could have led to an overestimation of their economic value.

Economic Evaluation of In-Hospital Clinical Practices in Acute Injury Care: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Underuse of high-value clinical practices and overuse of low-value practices are major sources of inefficiencies in modern healthcare systems. To achieve value-based care, guidelines and recommendations should target both underuse and overuse and be supported by evidence from economic evaluations. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of the economic value of in-hospital clinical practices in acute injury care to advance knowledge on value-based care in this patient population.

METHODS

Pairs of independent reviewers systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register for full economic evaluations of in-hospital clinical practices in acute trauma care published from 2009 to 2019 (last updated on June 17, 2020). Results were converted into incremental net monetary benefit and were summarized with forest plots. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020164494).

RESULTS

Of 33 910 unique citations, 75 studies met our inclusion criteria. We identified 62 cost-utility, 8 cost-effectiveness, and 5 cost-minimization studies. Values of incremental net monetary benefit ranged from international dollars -467 000 to international dollars 194 000. Of 114 clinical interventions evaluated (vs comparators), 56 were cost-effective. We identified 15 cost-effective interventions in emergency medicine, 6 in critical care medicine, and 35 in orthopedic medicine. A total of 58 studies were classified as high quality and 17 as moderate quality. From studies with a high level of evidence (randomized controlled trials), 4 interventions were clearly dominant and 8 were dominated.

CONCLUSIONS

This research advances knowledge on value-based care for injury admissions. Results suggest that almost half of clinical interventions in acute injury care that have been studied may not be cost-effective.

Clinical practice guideline recommendations for pediatric injury care: protocol for a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Evidence suggests the presence of deficiencies in the quality of care provided to up to half of all paediatric trauma patients in Canada, the USA and Australia. Lack of adherence to evidence-based recommendations may be driven by lack of knowledge of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), heterogeneity in recommendations or concerns about their quality. We aim to systematically review CPG recommendations for paediatric injury care and appraise their quality.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will identify CPG recommendations through a comprehensive search strategy including Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Cochrane library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials and websites of organisations publishing recommendations on paediatric injury care. We will consider CPGs including at least one recommendation targeting paediatric injury populations on any diagnostic or therapeutic intervention from the acute phase of care with any comparator developed in high-income countries in the last 15 years (January 2007 to a maximum of 6 months prior to submission). Pairs of reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full text of eligible articles, extract data and evaluate the quality of CPGs and their recommendations using Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II and AGREE Recommendations Excellence instruments, respectively. We will synthesise evidence on recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence-to-Decision framework and present results within a recommendations matrix.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not a requirement as this study is based on available published data. The results of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at international scientific meetings and distributed to healthcare providers.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021226934).

Quality Indicators Targeting Low-Value Clinical Practices in Trauma Care

Importance

The use of quality indicators has been shown to improve injury care processes and outcomes. However, trauma quality indicators proposed to date exclusively target the underuse of recommended practices. Initiatives such as Choosing Wisely publish lists of practices to be questioned, but few apply to trauma care, and most have not successfully been translated to quality indicators.

Objective

To develop a set of evidence and patient-informed, consensus-based quality indicators targeting reductions in low-value clinical practices in acute, in-hospital trauma care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This 2-round Research and Development/University of California at Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) consensus study, conducted from April 20 to June 9, 2021, comprised an online questionnaire and a virtual workshop led by 2 independent moderators. Two panels of international experts from Canada, Australia, the US, and the UK, and local stakeholders from Québec, Canada, represented key clinical expertise involved in trauma care and included 3 patient partners.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Panelists were asked to rate 50 practices on a 7-point Likert scale according to 4 quality indicator criteria: importance, supporting evidence, actionability, and measurability.

Results

Of 49 eligible experts approached, 46 (94%; 18 experts [39%] aged ≥50 years; 37 men [80%]) completed at least 1 round and 36 (73%) completed both rounds. Eleven quality indicators were selected overall, 2 more were selected by the international panel and a further 3 by the local stakeholder panel. Selected indicators targeted low-value clinical practices in the following aspects of trauma care: (1) initial diagnostic imaging (head, cervical spine, ankle, and pelvis), (2) repeated diagnostic imaging (posttransfer computed tomography [CT] and repeated head CT), (3) consultation (neurosurgical and spine), (4) surgery (penetrating neck injury), (5) blood product administration, (6) medication (antibiotic prophylaxis and late seizure prophylaxis), (7) trauma service admission (blunt abdominal trauma), (8) intensive care unit admission (mild complicated traumatic brain injury), and (9) routine blood work (minor orthopedic surgery).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this consensus study, a set of consensus-based quality indicators were developed that were informed by the best available evidence and patient priorities, targeting low-value trauma care. Selected indicators represented a trauma-specific list of practices, the use of which should be questioned. Trauma quality programs in high-income countries may use these study results as a basis to select context-specific quality indicators to measure and reduce low-value care.

Intensity of hospital resource use following traumatic brain injury: a multicentre cohort study, 2013-2016

Background:

The knowledge gap regarding acute care resource use for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) impedes efforts to improve the efficiency and quality of the care of these patients. Our objective was to evaluate interhospital variation in resource use for patients with TBI, identify determinants of high resource use and assess the association between hospital resource use and clinical outcomes.

Methods:

We conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study including patients aged 16 years and older admitted to the inclusive trauma system of Quebec following TBI, between 2013 and 2016. We estimated resource use using activity-based costs. Clinical outcomes included mortality, complications and unplanned hospital readmission. Interhospital variation was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Correlations between hospital resource use and clinical outcomes were evaluated using correlation coefficients on weighted, risk-adjusted estimates with 95% CIs.

Results:

We included 6319 patients. We observed significant interhospital variation in resource use for patients discharged alive, which was not explained by patient case mix (ICC 0.052, 95% CI 0.043 to 0.061). Adjusted mean resource use for patients discharged to long-term care was more than twice that of patients discharged home. Hospitals with higher resource use tended to have a lower incidence of mortality (r −0.347, 95% CI −0.559 to −0.087) and unplanned readmission (r −0.249, 95% CI −0.481 to 0.020) but a higher incidence of complications (r 0.491, 95% CI 0.255 to 0.666).

Conclusion:

Resource use for TBI varies significantly among hospitals and may be associated with differences in mortality and morbidity. Negative associations with mortality and positive associations with complications should be interpreted with caution but suggest there may be a trade-off between adverse events and survival that should be evaluated further.

Adherence to Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations on Low-Value Injury Care: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

Low-value clinical practices have been identified as one of the most important areas of excess healthcare spending. Nevertheless, there is a knowledge gap on the scale of this problem in injury care. We aimed to identify clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations pertaining to low-value injury care, estimate how frequently they are used in practice, and evaluate interhospital variations in their use.

METHODS

We identified low-value clinical practices from internationally recognized CPGs. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from a Canadian trauma system (2014-2019) to calculate frequencies and assess interhospital variations.

RESULTS

We identified 29 low-value practices. Fourteen could be measured using trauma registry data. The 3 low-value clinical practices with the highest absolute and relative frequencies were computed tomography (CT) in adults with minor head injury (n = 5591, 24%), cervical spine CT (n = 2742, 31%), and whole-body CT in minor or single-system trauma (n = 530, 32%). We observed high interhospital variation for decompressive craniectomy in diffuse traumatic brain injury. Frequencies and interhospital variations were low for magnetic resonance imaging, intracranial pressure monitoring, inferior vena cava filter use, and surgical management of blunt abdominal injuries.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed evidence of poor adherence to CPG recommendations on low-value CT imaging and high practice variation for decompressive craniectomy. Results suggest that adherence to recommendations for the 10 other low-value practices is high. These data can be used to advance the research agenda on low-value injury care and inform the development of interventions targeting reductions in healthcare overuse in this population.

The Use of Virtual Reality in Back Pain Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review aimed to synthesize the existing evidence of extended reality (XR) on pain and motor function outcomes in patients with back pain. Following the Cochrane guidelines, relevant articles of any language were selected by 2 independent reviewers from CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Medline and Web of Knowledge databases. Of 2,050 unique citations, 24 articles were included in our review. These studies included a total of 900 back pain patients. Despite broader XR search, all interventions were virtual reality (VR) based and involved physical exercises (n = 17, 71%), hippotherapy (n = 4, 17%), motor imagery (n = 1, 4%), distraction (n = 1, 4%), and cognitive-behavior therapy (n = 1, 4%). Sixteen controlled studies were included in a meta-analysis which suggested that VR provides a significant improvement in terms of back pain intensity over control interventions (Mean Difference: -0.67; 95% CI: -1.12 to -0.23; I² = 85%). Almost all included studies presented high risk of bias, highlighting the need to improve methodology in the examination of VR interventions. While the specific set of studies showed high heterogeneity across several methodological factors, a tentative conclusion could be drawn that VR was effective improving back pain intensity and tends to have a positive effect on improving other pain outcomes and motion function. PERSPECTIVE: Extended reality technologies have appeared as interesting nonpharmacological options for the treatment of back pain, with the potential to minimise the need for opioid medications. Our systematic review summarised existing applications of extended reality for back pain and proposed a few recommendations to direct further studies in the field.

Effectiveness of trauma centre verification: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There is a growing trend toward verification of trauma centres, but its impact remains unclear. This systematic review aimed to synthesize available evidence on the effectiveness of trauma centre verification.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search of the CINAHL, Embase, HealthStar, MEDLINE and ProQuest databases, as well as the websites of key injury organizations for grey literature, from inception to June 2019, without language restrictions. Our population consisted of injured patients treated at trauma centres. The intervention was trauma centre verification. Comparison groups comprised nonverified trauma centres, or the same centre before it was first verified or re-verified. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes included adverse events, resource use and processes of care. We computed pooled summary estimates using random-effects meta-analysis.

Results

Of 5125 citations identified, 29, all conducted in the United States, satisfied our inclusion criteria. Mortality was the most frequently investigated outcome (n = 20), followed by processes of care (n = 12), resource use (n = 12) and adverse events (n = 7). The risk of bias was serious to critical in 22 studies. We observed an imprecise association between verification and decreased mortality (relative risk 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.52 to 1.06) in severely injured patients.

Conclusion

Our review showed mixed and inconsistent associations between verification and processes of care or patient outcomes. The validity of the published literature is limited by the lack of robust controls, as well as any evidence from outside the US, which precludes extrapolation to other health care jurisdictions. Quasiexperimental studies are needed to assess the impact of trauma centre verification.

Systematic reviews registration

PROSPERO no. CRD42018107083

S100B protein level for the detection of clinically significant intracranial haemorrhage in patients with mild traumatic brain injury: a subanalysis of a prospective cohort study

Background

Clinical assessment of patients with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is challenging and overuse of head CT in the ED is a major problem. Several studies have attempted to reduce unnecessary head CTs following a mTBI by identifying new tools aiming to predict intracranial bleeding. Higher levels of S100B protein have been associated with intracranial haemorrhage following a mTBI in previous literature. The main objective of this study is to assess whether plasma S100B protein level is associated with clinically significant brain injury and could be used to reduce the number of head CT post-mTBI.

Methods

Study design: secondary analysis of a prospective multicentre cohort study conducted between 2013 and 2016 in five Canadian EDs. Inclusion criteria: non-hospitalised patients with mTBI with a GCS score of 13–15 in the ED and a blood sample drawn within 24 hours after the injury. Data collected: sociodemographic and clinical data were collected in the ED. S100B protein was analysed using ELISA. All CT scans were reviewed by a radiologist blinded to the biomarker results. Main outcome: the presence of clinically important brain injury.

Results

476 patients were included. Mean age was 41±18 years old and 150 (31.5%) were women. Twenty-four (5.0%) patients had a clinically significant intracranial haemorrhage. Thirteen patients (2.7%) presented a non-clinically significant brain injury. A total of 37 (7.8%) brain injured patients were included in our study. S100B median value (Q1–Q3) was: 0.043 µg/L (0.008–0.080) for patients with clinically important brain injury versus 0.039 µg/L (0.023–0.059) for patients without clinically important brain injury. Sensitivity and specificity of the S100B protein level, if used alone to detect clinically important brain injury, were 16.7% (95% CI 4.7% to 37.4%) and 88.5% (95% CI 85.2% to 91.3%), respectively.

Conclusion

Plasma S100B protein level was not associated with clinically significant intracranial lesion in patients with mTBI.

Inter-hospital variation in surgical intensity for trauma admissions: A multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for injury care are increasingly moving away from surgical management towards less invasive procedures but there is a knowledge gap on how these recommendations are influencing practice. We aimed to assess inter-hospital variation in surgical intensity for injury admissions and evaluate the correlation between hospital surgical intensity and mortality/complications.

METHODS

We included adults admitted for major trauma between 2006 and 2016 in a Canadian provincial trauma system. Analyses were stratified for orthopaedic (n = 16 887), neurological (n = 12 888) and torso injuries (n = 9816). Surgical intensity was quantified with the number of surgical procedures <72 hours. Inter-hospital variation was assessed with the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). We assessed the correlation between the risk-adjusted mean number of surgical procedures and risk-adjusted incidence of mortality and complications using Pearson correlation coefficients (r).

RESULTS

Moderate inter-hospital variation was observed for orthopaedic surgery (ICC = 14.0%) whereas variation was low for torso surgery (ICC = 2.7%) and neurosurgery (ICC = 0.8%). Surgical intensity was negatively correlated with hospital mortality for torso injury (r = -.32, P = .02) and neurotrauma (r = -.65, P = .08). A strong positive correlation was observed with hospital complications for orthopaedic injuries (r = .36, P = .006) whereas the opposite was observed for neurotrauma (r = -.71, P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Results should be interpreted with caution as they may be a result of residual confounding. However, they may suggest that there are opportunities for quality improvement in surgical care for injury admissions, particularly for orthopaedic injuries. Moving forward, we should aim to prospectively evaluate adherence to guidelines on non-operative management and their impact on mortality and morbidity.

Low-Value Clinical Practices in Adult Traumatic Brain Injury: An Umbrella Review

Despite numerous interventions and treatment options, the outcomes of traumatic brain injury (TBI) have improved little over the last 3 decades, which raises concern about the value of care in this patient population. We aimed to synthesize the evidence on 14 potentially low-value clinical practices in TBI care. Using umbrella review methodology, we identified systematic reviews evaluating the effectiveness of 14 potentially low-value practices in adults with acute TBI. We present data on methodological quality (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews), reported effect sizes, and credibility of evidence (I to IV). The only clinical practice with evidence of benefit was therapeutic hypothermia (credibility of evidence II to IV). However, the most recent meta-analysis on hypothermia based on high-quality trials suggested harm (credibility of evidence IV). Meta-analyses on platelet transfusion for patients on antiplatelet therapy were all consistent with harm but were statistically non-significant. For the following practices, effect estimates were consistently close to the null: computed tomography (CT) in adults with mild TBI who are low-risk on a validated clinical decision rule; repeat CT in adults with mild TBI on anticoagulant therapy with no clinical deterioration; antibiotic prophylaxis for external ventricular drain placement; and decompressive craniectomy for refractory intracranial hypertension. We identified five clinical practices with evidence of lack of benefit or harm. However, evidence could not be considered to be strong for any clinical practice as effect measures were imprecise and heterogeneous, systematic reviews were often of low quality, and most included studies had a high risk of bias.

Contribution of Substance Use in Acute Injuries With Regards to the Intent, Nature and Context of Injury: A CHIRPP Database Study

Introduction

Using the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program (CHIRPP) sentinel surveillance system, the objective of this study was to compare intent, circumstances, injury type and patient demographics in patients who used a substance prior to the injury versus those who did not use any substances.

Methods

Data were retrospectively collected from November 1^st 2016 to October 31^st 2017. All patients presenting to the Hôpital de l’Enfant-Jésus ED following trauma were included, aside from those who left without seeing a physician or had no physical injury (e.g., overdose without any trauma was excluded). Patients voluntarily completed a standardised form or agreed to be contacted later. Medical charts of all attendances were reviewed by the CHIRPP’s program coordinator. Substance use included illicit drugs, medications for recreational purposes, alcohol or other used either by the patient or another person involved.

Results

A total of 12,857 patients were included. Substance use was involved in 701 (5.5%) cases and was associated with injuries sustained by males (p < .001). The mean age of patients injured while using substances was 42.8 years, compared to 45.5 years in those who did not use substances (p < .001). Substance use was involved in 3.6% of unintentional injuries, compared to 26.2% of injuries intentionally inflicted by other and 38.9% for self-inflicted injuries (p < 0.0001). When substances were used, the odds of intentional injuries were 7.5 times greater compared to non-intentional injuries (95% CI 6.7, 8.5). Burns, head injuries and polytraumas were more prevalent when drugs or alcohol were involved.

Conclusion

This study outlines the significant contribution of substance use in intentional injuries, suggesting that it could potentially be beneficial to specifically target patients who present with deliberate physical injuries in preventive and therapeutic interventions offered in the ED.

Economic evaluation of intrahospital clinical practices in injury care: protocol for a 10-year systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Underuse of high-value clinical practices and overuse of low-value practices are major sources of inefficiencies in modern healthcare systems. Injuries are second only to cardiovascular disease in terms of acute care costs but data on the economic impact of clinical practices for injury admissions are lacking. This study aims to summarise evidence on the economic value of intrahospital clinical practices for injury care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will perform a systematic review to identify research articles in economic evaluation of intrahospital clinical practices in acute injury care. We will search MEDLINE and databases such as Embase, Web of Science, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Cochrane CENTRAL, BIOSIS and CINAHL for randomised or non-randomised controlled trials and observational studies using a combination of keywords and controlled vocabulary. We will consider the following outcomes relative to economic evaluations: incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, incremental cost-utility ratio, incremental net health benefit, incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) and incremental cost-benefit ratio. Pairs of independent reviewers will evaluate studies that meet eligibility criteria and extract data from included articles using an electronic data extraction form. All outcomes will be converted into iNMB. We will report iNMB for practices classified by type of practice (hospitalisation, consultation, diagnostic, therapeutic-surgical, therapeutic-drugs, therapeutic-other). Results obtained with a ceiling ratio of $50 000 per quality-adjusted life year gained for identified clinical practices will be summarised by charting forest plots. In line with Cochrane recommendations for systematic reviews of economic evaluations, meta-analyses will not be conducted.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required as original data will not be collected. This study will summarise existing evidence on the economic value of clinical practices in injury care. Results will be used to advance knowledge on value-based care for injury admissions and will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed article, international scientific meetings and clinical and healthcare quality associations.

Clinically significant traumatic intracranial hemorrhage following minor head trauma in older adults: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to determine the incidence of clinically significant traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (T-ICH) following minor head trauma in older adults. Secondary objective was to investigate the impact of anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapies on T-ICH incidence.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study extracted data from electronic patient records. The cohort consisted of patients presenting after a fall and/or head injury and presented to one of five ED between 1st March 2010 and 31st July 2017. Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 65 years old and a minor head trauma defined as an impact to the head without fulfilling criteria for traumatic brain injury.

RESULTS

From the 1,000 electronic medical records evaluated, 311 cases were included. The mean age was 80.1 (SD 7.9) years. One hundred and eighty-nine (189) patients (60.8%) were on an anticoagulant (n = 69), antiplatelet (n = 130) or both (n = 16). Twenty patients (6.4%) developed a clinically significant T-ICH. Anticoagulation and/or antiplatelets therapies were not associated with an increased risk of clinically significant T-ICH in this cohort (Odds ratio (OR) 2.7, 95% CI 0.9-8.3).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of older adults presenting to the ED following minor head trauma, the incidence of clinically significant T-ICH was 6.4%.

Strategies aimed at preventing chronic opioid use in trauma and acute care surgery: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Globally every year, millions of patients sustain traumatic injuries and require acute care surgeries. A high incidence of chronic opioid use (up to 58%) has been documented in these populations with significant negative individual and societal impacts. Despite the importance of this public health issue, optimal strategies to limit the chronic use of opioids after trauma and acute care surgery are not clear. We aim to identify existing strategies to prevent chronic opioid use in these populations.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will perform a scoping review of peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed literature to identify studies, reviews, recommendations and guidelines on strategies aimed at preventing chronic opioid use in patients after trauma and acute care surgery. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINHAL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, ProQuest and websites of trauma and acute care surgery, pain, government and professional organisations. Databases will be searched for papers published from 1 January 2005 to a maximum of 6 months before submission of the final manuscript. Two reviewers will independently evaluate studies for eligibility and extract data from included studies using a standardised data abstraction form. Preventive strategies will be classified according to their types and targeted trauma populations and acute care surgery procedures.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Research ethics approval is not required as this study is based on the secondary use of published data. This work will inform research and clinical stakeholders on the required next steps towards the uptake of effective strategies aimed at preventing chronic opioid use in trauma and acute care surgery patients.

Low-value injury care in the adult orthopaedic trauma population: a protocol for a rapid review

INTRODUCTION

Orthopaedic injuries affect almost 90% of trauma patients. A previous scoping review and expert consultation survey identified 15 potential low-value intra-hospital practices in the adult orthopaedic trauma population. Limiting the frequency of such practices could reduce adverse events, improve clinical outcomes and free up resources. The aim of this study is to synthesise the evidence on intra-hospital practices for orthopaedic injuries, previously identified as potentially of low value.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search Medline, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Epistemonikos to identify systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cohort studies and case-control studies that evaluate selected practices according to a priori PICOS statements (Population-Intervention-Comparator-Outcome-Study design) . We will evaluate the methodological quality for systematic reviews using the Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews version 2 (AMSTAR-2). Risk of bias in original studies will be evaluated with the Cochrane revised tool for RCTs (RoB2) and with the risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. If for a given practice, more than two original studies on our primary outcome are identified, we will conduct meta-analysis using a random effects model and assess heterogeneity using the I² index. We will assess credibility of evidence (I-IV) based on statistical significance, sample size, heterogeneity and bias as per published criteria.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required as original data will not be collected. Knowledge users from three level I trauma centres are involved in the design and conduct of the study in accordance with an integrated knowledge translation approach. Findings related to the rapid review will be available in May 2020. They will be presented to key stakeholders to inform discussions and raise awareness on low-value injury care. In addition, results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, at national and international scientific meetings and to healthcare associations.

Trends of clinical outcomes in patients with a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in Canada between 2006 and 2012

BACKGROUND

Traumatic brain injuries (TBI) are the leading cause of death for people aged <40 years. In Canada, the structure of trauma care has evolved independently across provinces during the last decade. However, little is known about the evolution of clinical outcomes. We aimed to compare trends in hospital mortality, unplanned readmission, hospital length of stay (LOS) and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS for TBI between 2006 and 2012 across Canadian provinces.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicentre cohort study based on TBI admissions across Canadian level I and II trauma centres. Data were extracted from the National Trauma Registry linked to hospital discharge databases. All adults with an injury severity score ≥12 were included. Multilevel generalized linear models were used to evaluate trends in clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Between 2006 and 2012, we observed a decrease in mortality in Canada (odd ratio [OR] = 0.95; 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 0.92-0.98) mostly driven by Ontario (OR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.93-0.98). We observed a significant decrease in hospital length of stay in Canada (hazard ratio [HR]: hazard of being discharged alive from hospital = 1.02; 95% CI = 1.01-1.02) mostly driven by a decrease in Quebec (HR = 1.03; 95% CI = 1.01-1.04). We observed a decrease in ICU Length of stay only in Alberta (HR = 1.05; 95% CI = 1.01-1.09). No trend was observed for hospital readmissions.

CONCLUSION

We observed significant decreases in mortality, hospital and ICU length of stay for TBI in Canada between 2006 and 2012 but only in certain provinces. This study may represent the first step towards a better understanding of the influence of trauma system configuration on the burden of injuries in Canada.

Effectiveness of trauma centers verification: Protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The implementation of trauma systems in many high-income countries over the last 50 years has led to important reductions in injury mortality and disability in many healthcare jurisdictions. Injury organizations including the American College of Surgeons and the Trauma Association of Canada as well as the World Health Organization provide consensus-based recommendations on resources and processes for optimal injury care. Many hospitals treating trauma patients seek verification to demonstrate that they meet these recommendations. This process may be labeled differently across jurisdictions. In Canada for example, it is called accreditation, but it has the same objective and very similar modalities. The objective of the study described in this protocol is to systematically review evidence on the effectiveness of trauma center verification for improving clinical processes and patient outcomes in injury care.

METHODS

We will perform a systematic review of studies evaluating the association between trauma center verification and hospital mortality (primary outcome), as well as morbidity, resource utilization, and processes of care (secondary outcomes). We will search CINAHL, EMBASE, HealthStar, MEDLINE, and ProQuest databases, as well as key injury organization websites for gray literature. We will assess the methodological quality of studies using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) assessment tool. We are planning to conduct a meta-analysis if feasible based on the number of included studies and their heterogeneity. We will evaluate the quality of cumulative evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group methodology.

DISCUSSION

This review will provide a synthesis of the body of evidence on trauma center verification effectiveness. Results could reinforce current verification modalities and may suggest ways to optimize them. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at an international clinical conference.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018107083.

Resource use for older people hospitalised due to injury in a Canadian integrated trauma system: a retrospective multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Injuries represent one of the leading causes of preventable morbidity and mortality. For countries with ageing populations, admissions of injured older patients are increasing exponentially. Yet, we know little about hospital resource use for injured older patients. Our primary objective was to evaluate inter-hospital variation in the risk-adjusted resource use for injured older patients. Secondary objectives were to identify the determinants of resource use and evaluate its association with clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of injured older patients (≥65 years) admitted to any trauma centres in the province of Quebec (2013-2016, N = 33,184). Resource use was estimated using activity-based costing and modelled with multilevel linear models. We conducted separate subgroup analyses for patients with trauma and fragility fractures.

RESULTS

Risk-adjusted resource use varied significantly across trauma centres, more for older patients with fragility fractures (intra-class correlation coefficients [ICC] = 0.093, 95% CI [0.079, 0.102]) than with trauma (ICC = 0.047, 95% CI = 0.035-0.051). Risk-adjusted resource use increased with age, and the number of comorbidities, and varied with discharge destination (P < 0.001). Higher hospital resource use was associated with higher incidence of complications for trauma (Pearson correlation coefficient [r] = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.3-0.7) and fragility fractures (r = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.3-0.7) and with higher mortality for fragility fractures (r = 0.4, 95% CI = 0.2-0.6).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed significant inter-hospital variations in resource use for injured older patients. Hospitals with higher resource use did not have better clinical outcomes. Hospital resource use may not always positively impact patient care and outcomes. Future studies should evaluate mechanisms, by which hospital resource use impacts care.

Low-value clinical practices in adult traumatic brain injury: an umbrella review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) leads to 50 000 deaths, 85 000 disabilities and costs $60 billion each year in the USA. Despite numerous interventions and treatment options, the outcomes of TBI have improved little over the last three decades. In a previous scoping review and expert consultation survey, we identified 13 potentially low-value clinical practices in acute TBI. The objective of this umbrella review is to synthesise the evidence on potentially low-value clinical practices in the care of acute TBI.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Using umbrella review methodology, we will search Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Epistemonikos, International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) and PubMed to identify systematic reviews evaluating the effect of potential intrahospital low-value practices using tailored population, intervention, comparator, outcome and study design questions based on the results of a previous scoping review. We will present data on the methodological quality of these reviews (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews-2), reported effect sizes and strength of evidence (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required as original data will not be collected. Knowledge users from five healthcare quality organisations and clinical associations are involved in the design and conduct of the study. Results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, at international scientific meetings and to clinical, healthcare quality and patient-partner associations. This work will support the development of metrics to measure the use of low-value practices, inform policy makers on potential targets for deimplementation and in the long term reduce the use of low-value clinical practices in acute TBI care.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019132428.

Low-value clinical practices in injury care: A scoping review and expert consultation survey

BACKGROUND

Tests and treatments that are not supported by evidence and could expose patients to unnecessary harm, referred to here as low-value clinical practices, consume up to 30% of health care resources. Choosing Wisely and other organizations have published lists of clinical practices to be avoided. However, few apply to injury and most are based uniquely on expert consensus. We aimed to identify low-value clinical practices in acute injury care.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review targeting articles, reviews and guidelines that identified low-value clinical practices specific to injury populations. Thirty-six experts rated clinical practices on a five-point Likert scale from clearly low value to clearly beneficial. Clinical practices reported as low value by at least one level I, II, or III study and considered clearly or potentially low-value by at least 75% of experts were retained as candidates for low-value injury care.

RESULTS

Of 50,695 citations, 815 studies were included and led to the identification of 150 clinical practices. Of these, 63 were considered candidates for low-value injury care; 33 in the emergency room, 9 in trauma surgery, 15 in the intensive care unit, and 5 in orthopedics. We also identified 87 "gray zone" practices, which did not meet our criteria for low-value care.

CONCLUSION

We identified 63 low-value clinical practices in acute injury care that are supported by empirical evidence and expert opinion. Conditional on future research, they represent potential targets for guidelines, overuse metrics and de-implementation interventions. We also identified 87 "gray zone" practices, which may be interesting targets for value-based decision-making. Our study represents an important step toward the deimplementation of low-value clinical practices in injury care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Review, Level IV.

Impact of wearing a helmet on the risk of hospitalization and intracranial haemorrhage after a sports injury

BACKGROUND

Despite their reported protective effect against the occurrence of head injuries, helmets are still used inconsistently in sports in which they are optional. We aimed to assess the impact of helmet use on the risk of hospitalization and intracranial haemorrhage for trauma occurring during sport activities.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort of all patients who presented themselves, over an 18-month period, at the emergency department of a tertiary trauma centre for an injury sustained in a sport or leisure activity where the use of a helmet is optional. Impact of helmet use was assessed using multivariable regression analyses (relative risks, RR).

RESULTS

Among the 1,022 patients included in the study, half were cyclists and 40% were skiers or snowboarders. A total of 40 % of patients wore a helmet at the time of injury, 18% had a head injury, 16% were hospitalized and 13% of patients with a head injury had an intracranial haemorrhage. Among all patients, no association was observed between hospital admission and helmet use. However, helmet use in patients with a head injury was associated with significant reductions in the risks of hospitalization (RR 0.41 [95% CI: 0.22-0.76]) and intracranial haemorrhage (RR 0.28 [95% CI: 0.11-0.71]).

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that, in recreational athletes who sustain a head injury, helmet use is associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization (all sports) and intracranial haemorrhage (cyclists).

Impact of Trauma System Structure on Injury Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of trauma systems in decreasing injury mortality and morbidity has been well demonstrated. However, little is known about which components contribute to their effectiveness. We aimed to systematically review the evidence of the impact of trauma system components on clinically important injury outcomes.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and BIOSIS/Web of Knowledge, gray literature and trauma association Web sites to identify studies evaluating the association between at least one trauma system component and injury outcome. We calculated pooled effect estimates using inverse-variance random-effects models. We evaluated quality of evidence using GRADE criteria.

RESULTS

We screened 15,974 records, retaining 41 studies for qualitative synthesis and 19 for meta-analysis. Two recommended trauma system components were associated with reduced odds of mortality: inclusive design (odds ratio [OR] = 0.72 [0.65-0.80]) and helicopter transport (OR = 0.70 [0.55-0.88]). Pre-Hospital Advanced Trauma Life Support was associated with a significant reduction in hospital days (mean difference [MD] = 5.7 [4.4-7.0]) but a nonsignificant reduction in mortality (OR = 0.78 [0.44-1.39]). Population density of surgeons was associated with a nonsignificant decrease in mortality (MD = 0.58 [-0.22 to 1.39]). Trauma system maturity was associated with a significant reduction in mortality (OR = 0.76 [0.68-0.85]). Quality of evidence was low or very low for mortality and healthcare utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

This review offers low-quality evidence for the effectiveness of an inclusive design and trauma system maturity and very-low-quality evidence for helicopter transport in reducing injury mortality. Further research should evaluate other recommended components of trauma systems and non-fatal outcomes and explore the impact of system component interactions.

Invitations received from potential predatory publishers and fraudulent conferences: a 12-month early-career researcher experience

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This study aims to describe all unsolicited electronic invitations received from potential predatory publishers or fraudulent conferences over a 12-month period following the first publication as a corresponding author of a junior academician.

STUDY DESIGN

Unsolicited invitations received at an institutional email address and perceived to be sent by predatory publishers or fraudulent conferences were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 502 invitations were included of which 177 (35.3%) had subject matter relevant to the recipient's research interests and previous work. Two hundred and thirty-seven were invitations to publish a manuscript. Few disclosed the publication fees (32, 13.5%) but they frequently reported accepting all types of manuscripts (167, 70.5%) or emphasised on a deadline to submit (165, 69.6%). Invitations came from 39 publishers (range 1 to 87 invitations per publisher). Two hundred and ten invitations from a potential fraudulent conference were received. These meetings were held in Europe (97, 46.2%), North America (65, 31.0%), Asia (20.4%) or other continents (5, 2.4%) and came from 18 meeting organisation groups (range 1 to 137 invitations per organisation). Becoming an editorial board member (30), the editor-in-chief (1), a guest editor for journal special issue (6) and write a book chapter (11) were some of the roles offered in the other invitations included while no invitation to review a manuscript was received.

CONCLUSIONS

Young researchers are commonly exposed to predatory publishers and fraudulent conferences following a single publication as a corresponding author. Academic institutions worldwide need to educate and inform young researchers of this emerging problem.

Prognostic Value of S-100β Protein for Prediction of Post-Concussion Symptoms after a Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the prognostic value of S-100β protein to identify patients with post-concussion symptoms after a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). A search strategy was submitted to seven databases from their inception to October 2016. Individual patient data were requested. Cohort studies evaluating the association between S-100β protein level and post-concussion symptoms assessed at least seven days after the mTBI were considered. Outcomes were dichotomized as persistent (≥3 months) or early (≥7 days <3 months). Our search strategy yielded 23,298 citations of which 29 studies including between seven and 223 patients (n = 2505) were included. Post-concussion syndrome (PCS) (16 studies) and neuropsychological symptoms (9 studies) were the most frequently assessed outcomes. The odds of having persistent PCS (odds ratio [OR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34-1.12, p = 0.11, I² 0% [n = five studies]) in patients with an elevated S-100β protein serum level were not significantly different from those of patients with normal values while the odds of having early PCS (OR 1.67, 95% CI: 0.98-2.85, p = 0.06, I² 38% [n = five studies]) were close to statistical significance. Similarly, having an elevated S-100β protein serum level was not associated with the odds of returning to work at six months (OR 2.31, 95% CI: 0.50-10.64, p = 0.28, I² 22% [n = two studies]). Overall risk of bias was considered moderate. Results suggest that the prognostic biomarker S-100β protein has a low clinical value to identify patients at risk of persistent post-concussion symptoms. Variability in injury to S-100ß protein sample time, mTBI populations, and outcomes assessed could potentially explain the lack of association and needs further evaluation.

Predatory publishers and fraudulent conferences: Perspectives and implications for novice researchers

None

Prognostic value of neuron-specific enolase (NSE) for prediction of post-concussion symptoms following a mild traumatic brain injury: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review aimed to determine the prognostic value of neuron-specific enolase (NSE) to predict post-concussion symptoms following mild traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHODS

Seven databases were searched for studies evaluating the association between NSE levels and post-concussion symptoms assessed ≥ 3 months (persistent) or ≥ 7 days < 3 months (early) after mild TBI. Two researchers independently screened studies for inclusion, extracted data and appraised quality using the Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool.

RESULTS

The search strategy yielded a total of 23,298 citations from which 8 cohorts presented in 10 studies were included. Studies included between 45 and 141 patients (total 608 patients). The outcomes most frequently assessed were post-concussion syndrome (PCS, 12 assessments) and neuropsychological performance deficits (10 assessments). No association was found between an elevated NSE serum level and PCS. Only one study reported a statistically significant association between a higher NSE serum level and alteration of at least three cognitive domains at 2 weeks but this association was no longer significant at 6 weeks. Overall, risk of bias of the included studies was considered moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Early NSE serum level is not a strong independent predictor of post-concussion symptoms following mild TBI.

Characteristics of patients included and enrolled in studies on the prognostic value of serum biomarkers for prediction of postconcussion symptoms following a mild traumatic brain injury: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) has been insufficiently researched, and its definition remains elusive. Investigators are confronted by heterogeneity in patients, mechanism of injury and outcomes. Findings are thus often limited in generalisability and clinical application. Serum protein biomarkers are increasingly assessed to enhance prognostication of outcomes, but their translation into clinical practice has yet to be achieved. A systematic review was performed to describe the adult populations included and enrolled in studies that evaluated the prognostic value of protein biomarkers to predict postconcussion symptoms following an mTBI.

DATA SOURCES

Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycBITE and PsycINFO up to October 2016.

DATA SELECTION AND EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently screened for potentially eligible studies, extracted data and assessed the overall quality of evidence by outcome using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

A total of 23 298 citations were obtained from which 166 manuscripts were reviewed. Thirty-six cohort studies (2812 patients) having enrolled between 7 and 311 patients (median 89) fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Most studies excluded patients based on advanced age (n=10 (28%)), neurological disorders (n=20 (56%)), psychiatric disorders (n=17 (47%)), substance abuse disorders (n=13 (36%)) or previous traumatic brain injury (n=10 (28%)). Twenty-one studies (58%) used at least two of these exclusion criteria. The pooled mean age of included patients was 39.3 (SD 4.6) years old (34 studies). The criteria used to define a mTBI were inconsistent. The most frequently reported outcome was postconcussion syndrome using the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (n=18 (50%)) with follow-ups ranging from 7 days to 5 years after the mTBI.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies have recruited samples that are not representative and generalisable to the mTBI population. These exclusion criteria limit the potential use and translation of promising serum protein biomarkers to predict postconcussion symptoms.

Low-value clinical practices in injury care: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Preventable injuries lead to 200 000 hospital stays, 60 000 disabilities, and 13 000 deaths per year in Canada with direct costs of $20 billion. Overall, potentially unnecessary medical interventions are estimated to consume up to 30% of healthcare resources and may expose patients to avoidable harm. However, little is known about overuse for acute injury care. We aim to identify low-value clinical practices in injury care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will perform a scoping review of peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed literature to identify research articles, reviews, recommendations and guidelines that identify at least one low-value clinical practice specific to injury populations. We will search Medline, EMBASE, COCHRANE central, and BIOSIS/Web of Knowledge databases, websites of government agencies, professional societies and patient advocacy organisations, thesis holdings and conference proceedings. Pairs of independent reviewers will evaluate studies for eligibility and extract data from included articles using a prepiloted and standardised electronic data abstraction form. Low-value clinical practices will be categorised using an extension of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality conceptual framework and data will be presented using narrative synthesis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required as original data will not be collected. This study will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, international scientific meetings, and to knowledge users through clinical and healthcare quality associations. This review will contribute new knowledge on low-value clinical practices in acute injury care. Our results will support the development indicators to measure resource overuse and inform policy makers on potential targets for deadoption in injury care.

Impact of trauma centre designation level on outcomes following hemorrhagic shock: a multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Hemorrhagic shock is responsible for 45% of injury fatalities in North America, and 50% of these occur within 2 h of injury. There is currently a lack of evidence regarding the trajectories of patients in hemorrhagic shock and the potential benefit of level I/II care for these patients. We aimed to compare mortality across trauma centre designation levels for patients in hemorrhagic shock. Secondary objectives were to compare surgical delays, complications and hospital length of stay (LOS).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study based on a Canadian inclusive trauma system (1999-2012), including adults with systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 90 mm Hg on arrival who required urgent surgical care (< 6 h). Logistic regression was used to examine the influence of trauma centre designation level on risk-adjusted surgical delays, mortality and complications. Linear regression was used to examine LOS.

RESULTS

Compared with level I centres, adjusted odds ratios (and 95% confidence intervals [CI]) of mortality for level III and IV centres were 1.71 (1.03-2.85) and 2.25 (1.08-4.73), respectively. Surgical delays did not vary across designation levels, but mean LOS and complications were lower in level II-IV centres than level I centres.

CONCLUSION

Level I/II centres may offer a survival advantage over level III/IV centres for patients requiring emergency intervention for hemorrhagic shock. Further research with larger sample sizes is required to confirm these results and to identify optimal transport time thresholds for bypassing level III/IV centres in favour of level I/II centres.

Hospital length of stay following admission for traumatic brain injury in a Canadian integrated trauma system: A retrospective multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the leading cause of disability in children and young adults and costs CAD$3 billion annually in Canada. Stakeholders have expressed the urgent need to obtain information on resource use for TBI to improve the quality and efficiency of acute care in this patient population. We aimed to assess the components and determinants of hospital and ICU LOS for TBI admissions.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective multicenter cohort study on 11,199 adults admitted for TBI between 2007 and 2012 in an inclusive Canadian trauma system. Our primary outcome measure was index hospital LOS (admission to the hospital with the highest designation level). Index LOS was compared to total LOS (all consecutive admissions related to the injury). Expected LOS was calculated by matching TBI admissions to all-diagnosis hospital admissions by age, gender, and year of admission. LOS determinants were identified using multilevel linear regression.

RESULTS

Geometric mean total LOS was 1day longer than geometric mean index LOS (12.6 versus 11.7 days). Observed index and ICU LOS were respectively 4.2days and 2.5days longer than that expected according to all-diagnosis admissions. The six most important determinants of LOS were discharge destination, severity of concomitant injuries, extracranial complications, GCS, TBI severity, and mechanical ventilation, accounting for 80% of explained variation.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this multicenter retrospective cohort study suggest that hospital and ICU LOS for TBI admissions are 56% and 119% longer than expected according to all-diagnosis admissions, respectively. In addition, hospital LOS is underestimated when only the index visit is considered and is largely influenced by discharge destination and extracranial complications, suggesting that improvements could be achieved with better discharge planning and interventions targeting prevention of in-hospital complications. This study highlights the importance of considering TBI patients as a distinct population when allocating resources or planning quality improvement interventions.