Determinants of long-term physical and mental health outcomes after intensive care admission for trauma survivors.

INTRODUCTION: Collectively, studies from medical and surgical intensive care units (ICU) suggest that long-term outcomes are poor for patients who have spent significant time in an ICU. We sought to identify determinants of post-intensive care physical and mental health outcomes 6-12 months after injury. METHODS: Adult trauma patients [ISS ≥9] admitted to one of three Level-1 trauma centers were interviewed 6-12 months post-injury to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. Patients requiring ICU admission â€‹≥ â€‹3 days ("ICU patients") were compared with those who did not require ICU admission ("non-ICU patients"). Multivariable regression models were built to identify factors associated with poor outcomes among ICU survivors. RESULTS: 2407 patients were followed [598 (25%) ICU and 1809 (75%) non-ICU patients]. Among ICU patients, 506 (85%) reported physical or mental health symptoms. Of them, 265 (52%) had physical symptoms only, 15 (3%) had mental symptoms only, and 226 (45%) had both physical and mental symptoms. In adjusted analyses, compared to non-ICU patients, ICU patients were more likely to have new limitations for ADLs (OR â€‹= â€‹1.57; 95% CI â€‹= â€‹1.21, 2.03), and worse SF-12 mental (mean Δ â€‹= â€‹-1.43; 95% CI â€‹= â€‹-2.79, -0.09) and physical scores (mean Δ â€‹= â€‹-2.61; 95% CI â€‹= â€‹-3.93, -1.28). Age, female sex, Black race, lower education level, polytrauma, ventilator use, history of psychiatric illness, and delirium during ICU stay were associated with poor outcomes in the ICU-admitted group. CONCLUSIONS: Physical impairment and mental health symptoms following ICU stay are highly prevalent among injury survivors. Modifiable ICU-specific factors such as early liberation from ventilator support and prevention of delirium are potential targets for intervention.

Nationwide, County-Level Analysis of the Patterns, Trends, and System-Level Predictors of Opioid Prescribing in Surgery in the US: Social Determinants and Access to Mental Health Services Matter.

BACKGROUND: The diversion of unused opioid prescription pills to the community at large contributes to the opioid epidemic in the US. In this county-level population-based study, we aimed to examine the US surgeons' opioid prescription patterns, trends, and system-level predictors in the peak years of the opioid epidemic. STUDY DESIGN: Using the Medicare Part D database (2013 to 2017), the mean number of opioid prescriptions per beneficiary (OPBs) was determined for each US county. Opioid-prescribing patterns were compared across counties. Multivariable linear regression was performed to determine relationships between county-level social determinants of health (demographic, eg median age and education level; socioeconomic, eg median income; population health status, eg percentage of current smokers; healthcare quality, eg rate of preventable hospital stays; and healthcare access, eg healthcare costs) and OPBs. RESULTS: Opioid prescription data were available for 1,969 of 3,006 (65.5%) US counties, and opioid-related deaths were recorded in 1,384 of 3,006 counties (46%). Nationwide, the mean OPBs decreased from 1.08 ± 0.61 in 2013 to 0.87 ± 0.55 in 2017; 81.6% of the counties showed the decreasing trend. County-level multivariable analyses showed that lower median population age, higher percentages of bachelor's degree holders, higher percentages of adults reporting insufficient sleep, higher healthcare costs, fewer mental health providers, and higher percentages of uninsured adults are associated with higher OPBs. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid prescribing by surgeons decreased between 2013 and 2017. A county's suboptimal access to healthcare in general and mental health services in specific may be associated with more opioid prescribing after surgery.

Circulating cellular clusters are associated with thrombotic complications and clinical outcomes in COVID-19.

We sought to study the role of circulating cellular clusters (CCC) -such as circulating leukocyte clusters (CLCs), platelet-leukocyte aggregates (PLA), and platelet-erythrocyte aggregates (PEA)- in the immunothrombotic state induced by COVID-19. Forty-six blood samples from 37 COVID-19 patients and 12 samples from healthy controls were analyzed with imaging flow cytometry. Patients with COVID-19 had significantly higher levels of PEAs (p value<0.001) and PLAs (p value = 0.015) compared to healthy controls. Among COVID-19 patients, CLCs were correlated with thrombotic complications (p value = 0.016), vasopressor need (p value = 0.033), acute kidney injury (p value = 0.027), and pneumonia (p value = 0.036), whereas PEAs were associated with positive bacterial cultures (p value = 0.033). In predictive in silico simulations, CLCs were more likely to result in microcirculatory obstruction at low flow velocities (≤1 mm/s) and at higher branching angles. Further studies on the cellular component of hyperinflammatory prothrombotic states may lead to the identification of novel biomarkers and drug targets for inflammation-related thrombosis.

Injury-related emergency department visits and unplanned readmissions are associated with worse long-term mental and physical health.

BACKGROUND: The risk factors for unplanned emergency department (ED) visits and readmission after injury and the impact of these unplanned visits on long-term outcomes are not well understood. We aim to: 1) describe the incidence of and risk factors for injury-related ED visits and unplanned readmissions following injury and, 2) explore the relationship between these unplanned visits and mental and physical health outcomes 6-12 months post-injury. METHODS: Trauma patients with moderate-to-severe injury admitted to one of three Level-I trauma centers were asked to complete a phone survey to assess mental and physical health outcomes at 6-12 months. Patient reported data on injury-related ED visits and readmissions was collected. Multivariable regression analyses were performed controlling for sociodemographic and clinical variables to compare subgroups. RESULTS: Of 7,781 eligible patients, 4675 were contacted and 3,147 completed the survey and were included in the analysis. 194 (6.2%) reported an unplanned injury-related ED visit and 239 (7.6%) reported an injury-related readmission. Risk factors for injury-related ED visits included: younger age, Black race, a lower level of education, Medicaid insurance, baseline psychiatric or substance abuse disorder and penetrating mechanism. Risk factors for unplanned injury-related readmission included younger age, male sex, Medicaid insurance, substance abuse disorder, greater injury severity and penetrating mechanism of injury. Injury-related ED visits and readmissions were associated with significantly higher rates of PTSD, chronic pain and new injury-related functional limitations in addition to lower SF-12 mental and physical composite scores. CONCLUSIONS: Injury-related ED visits and unplanned readmissions are common after hospital discharge following treatment of moderate-severe injury and are associated with worse mental and physical health outcomes.

Severity Grading Systems for Intraoperative Adverse Events. A Systematic Review of the Literature and Citation Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The accurate assessment and grading of adverse events (AE) is essential to ensure comparisons between surgical procedures and outcomes. The current lack of a standardized severity grading system may limit our understanding of the true morbidity attributed to AEs in surgery. The aim of this study is to review the prevalence in which intraoperative adverse event (iAE) severity grading systems are used in the literature, evaluate the strengths and limitations of these systems, and appraise their applicability in clinical studies. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were queried to yield all clinical studies reporting the proposal and/or the validation of iAE severity grading systems. Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched separately to identify the articles citing the systems to grade iAEs identified in the first search. RESULTS: Our search yielded 2957 studies, with 7 studies considered for the qualitative synthesis. Five studies considered only surgical/interventional iAEs, while 2 considered both surgical/interventional and anesthesiologic iAEs. Two included studies validated the iAE severity grading system prospectively. A total of 357 citations were retrieved, with an overall self/nonself-citation ratio of 0.17 (53/304). The majority of citing articles were clinical studies (44.1%). The average number of citations per year was 6.7 citations for each classification/severity system, with only 2.05 citations/year for clinical studies. Of the 158 clinical studies citing the severity grading systems, only 90 (56.9%) used them to grade the iAEs. The appraisal of applicability (mean%/median%) was below the 70% threshold in 3 domains: stakeholder involvement (46/47), clarity of presentation (65/67), and applicability (57/56). CONCLUSION: Seven severity grading systems for iAEs have been published in the last decade. Despite the importance of collecting and grading the iAEs, these systems are poorly adopted, with only a few studies per year using them. A uniform globally implemented severity grading system is needed to produce comparable data across studies and develop strategies to decrease iAEs, further improving patient safety.

Intersection of Race, Ethnicity, and Sex in New Functional Limitations after Injury: Black and Hispanic Female Survivors at Greater Risk.

BACKGROUND: The impact of disparities at the intersection of multiple marginalized social identities is poorly understood in trauma. We sought to evaluate the joint effect of race, ethnicity, and sex on new functional limitations 6 to 12 months postinjury. STUDY DESIGN: Moderately to severely injured patients admitted to one of three Level I trauma centers were asked to complete a phone-based survey assessing functional outcomes 6 to 12 months postinjury. Multivariate adjusted regression analyses were used to compare functional limitations by race and ethnicity alone, sex alone, and the interaction between both race and ethnicity and sex. The joint disparity and its composition were calculated across race and sex strata. RESULTS: Included were 4,020 patients: 1,621 (40.3%) non-Hispanic White male patients, 1,566 (39%) non-Hispanic White female patients, 570 (14.2%) Black or Hispanic/Latinx male patients, and 263 (6.5%) Black or Hispanic/Latinx female patients (BHF). The risk-adjusted incidence of functional limitations was highest among BHF (50.6%) vs non-Hispanic White female patients (39.2%), non-Hispanic White male patients (35.8%), and Black or Hispanic male patients (34.6%; p < 0.001). In adjusted analysis, women (odds ratio 1.35 [95% CI 1.16 to 1.57]; p < 0.001) and Blacks or Hispanic patients (odds ratio 1.28 [95% CI 1.03 to 1.58]; p = 0.02) were more likely to have new functional limitations 6 to 12 months postinjury. When sex and race were analyzed together, BHF were more likely to have new functional limitations compared with non-Hispanic White male patients (odds ratio 2.12 [1.55 to 2.90]; p < 0.001), with 63.5% of this joint disparity being explained by the intersection of race and ethnicity and sex. CONCLUSION: More than half of the race and sex disparity in functional limitations experienced by BHF is explained by the unique experience of being both minority and a woman. Intermediate modifiable factors contributing to this intersectional disparity must be identified.

Role of Transfusion Volume and Transfusion Rate as Markers of Futility During Ultramassive Blood Transfusion in Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Using a large national database, we evaluated the relationship between RBC transfusion volume, RBC transfusion rate, and in-hospital mortality to explore the presence of a futility threshold in trauma patients receiving ultramassive blood transfusion. STUDY DESIGN: The ACS-TQIP 2013 to 2018 database was analyzed. Adult patients who received ultramassive blood transfusion (≥20 units of RBC/24 hours) were included. RBC transfusion volume and rate were captured at the only 2 time points available in TQIP (4 hours and 24 hours), or time of death, whichever came first. RESULTS: Among 5,135 patients analyzed, in-hospital mortality rate was 62.1% (n = 3,190), and 4-hour and 24-hour mortality rates were 17.53% (n = 900) and 42.41% (n = 2,178), respectively. RBC transfusion volumes at 4 hours (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] 0.59 [95% CI 0.57 to 0.60]) and 24 hours (AUROC 0.59 [95% CI 0.57 to 0.60]) had low discriminatory ability for mortality and were inconclusive for futility. Mean RBC transfusion rates calculated within 4 hours (AUROC 0.65 [95% CI 0.63 to 0.66]) and 24 hours (AUROC 0.85 [95% CI 0.84 to 0.86]) had higher discriminatory ability than RBC transfusion volume. A futility threshold was not found for the mean RBC transfusion rate calculated within 4 hours. All patients with a final mean RBC transfusion rate of ≥7 U/h calculated within 24 hours of arrival experienced in-hospital death (n = 1,326); the observed maximum length of survival for these patients during the first 24 hours ranged from 24 hours for a rate of 7 U/h to 4.5 hours for rates ≥21 U/h. CONCLUSION: RBC transfusion volume within 4 or 24 hours and mean RBC transfusion rate within 4 hours were not markers of futility. The observed maximum length of survival per mean RBC transfusion rate could inform resuscitation efforts in trauma patients receiving ongoing transfusion between 4 and 24 hours.

Critically Appraising the Quality of Reporting of American College of Surgeons TQIP Studies in the Era of Large Data Research.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons-Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS-TQIP) database is one of the most widely used databases for trauma research. We aimed to critically appraise the quality of the methodological reporting of ACS-TQIP studies. STUDY DESIGN: The ACS-TQIP bibliography was queried for all studies published between January 2018 and January 2021. The quality of data reporting was assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology-Reporting of Studies Conducted Using Observational Routinely Collected Health Data (STROBE-RECORD) statement and the JAMA Surgery checklist. Three items from each tool were not applicable and thus excluded. The quality of reporting was compared between high- and low-impact factor (IF) journals (cutoff for high IF is >90th percentile of all surgical journals). RESULTS: A total of 118 eligible studies were included; 12 (10%) were published in high-IF journals. The median (interquartile range) number of criteria fulfilled was 5 (4-6) for the STROBE-RECORD statement (of 10 items) and 5 (5-6) for the JAMA Surgery checklist (of 7 items). Specifically, 73% of studies did not describe the patient population selection process, 61% did not address data cleaning or the implications of missing values, and 76% did not properly state inclusion/exclusion criteria and/or outcome variables. Studies published in high-IF journals had remarkably higher quality of reporting than those in low-IF journals. CONCLUSION: The methodological reporting quality of ACS-TQIP studies remains suboptimal. Future efforts should focus on improving adherence to standard reporting guidelines to mitigate potential bias and improve the reproducibility of published studies.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Long-term Recovery From Traumatic Injury.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the proportion and characteristics of traumatic injury survivors who perceive a negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their recovery and to define post-injury outcomes for this cohort. BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated physical, psychological, and social stressors that may create a uniquely difficult recovery and reintegration environment for injured patients. METHODS: Adult (≥18 years) survivors of moderate-to-severe injury completed a survey 6 to 14 months post-injury during the COVID-19 pandemic. This survey queried individuals about the perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on injury recovery and assessed post-injury functional and mental health outcomes. Regression models were built to identify factors associated with a perceived negative impact of the pandemic on injury recovery, and to define the relationship between these perceptions and long-term outcomes. RESULTS: Of 597 eligible trauma survivors who were contacted, 403 (67.5%) completed the survey. Twenty-nine percent reported that the COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted their recovery and 24% reported difficulty accessing needed healthcare. Younger age, lower perceived-socioeconomic status, extremity injury, and prior psychiatric illness were independently associated with negative perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on injury recovery. In adjusted analyses, patients who reported a negative impact of the pandemic on their recovery were more likely to have new functional limitations, daily pain, lower physical and mental component scores of the Short-Form-12 and to screen positive for PTSD and depression. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic is negatively impacting the recovery of trauma survivors. It is essential that we recognize the impact of the pandemic on injured patients while focusing on directed efforts to improve the long-term outcomes of this already at-risk population.

Validation of the Artificial Intelligence-Based Predictive Optimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk (POTTER) Calculator in Emergency General Surgery and Emergency Laparotomy Patients.

BACKGROUND: The Predictive Optimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk (POTTER) tool is an artificial intelligence-based calculator for the prediction of 30-day outcomes in patients undergoing emergency operations. In this study, we sought to assess the performance of POTTER in the emergency general surgery (EGS) population in particular. METHODS: All patients who underwent EGS in the 2017 American College of Surgeons NSQIP database were included. The performance of POTTER in predicting 30-day postoperative mortality, morbidity, and 18 specific complications was assessed using the c-statistic metric. As a subgroup analysis, the performance of POTTER in predicting the outcomes of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 59,955 patients were included. Median age was 50 years and 51.3% were women. POTTER predicted mortality (c-statistic = 0.93) and morbidity (c-statistic = 0.83) extremely well. Among individual complications, POTTER had the highest performance in predicting septic shock (c-statistic = 0.93), respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation for 48 hours or longer (c-statistic = 0.92), and acute renal failure (c-statistic = 0.92). Among patients undergoing emergency laparotomy, the c-statistic performances of POTTER in predicting mortality and morbidity were 0.86 and 0.77, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: POTTER is an interpretable, accurate, and user-friendly predictor of 30-day outcomes in patients undergoing EGS. POTTER could prove useful for bedside counseling of patients and their families and for benchmarking of EGS care.

Appraising the Quality of Reporting of American College of Surgeons NSQIP Emergency General Surgery Studies.

BACKGROUND: The quality of emergency general surgery (EGS) studies that use the American College of Surgeons-National Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database is variable. We aimed to critically appraise the methodologic reporting of EGS ACS-NSQIP studies. STUDY DESIGN: We searched the PubMed ACS-NSQIP bibliography for EGS studies published from 2004 to 2019. The quality of reporting of each study was assessed according to the number of criteria fulfilled with respect to the 13-item RECORD statement and the 10-item JAMA Surgery checklist. Three criteria in each checklist were not applicable and were therefore excluded. An analysis was conducted comparing studies published in high and low impact factor (IF) journals. RESULTS: We identified a total of 99 eligible studies. Twenty-six percent of studies were published in high IF journals, and 73% of the journals had a policy requiring adherence to reporting statements. The median number of criteria fulfilled for the RECORD statement (out of 10 items) and the JAMA Surgery checklist (out of 7 items) were both equal to 4 (interquartile range [IQR] 3, 5). Sixty-three percent of studies did not explain the methodology for data cleaning, 81% of studies did not describe the population selection process, and 55% did not discuss the implications of missing variables. There were no differences in overall scores between studies published in high and low IF journals. CONCLUSIONS: The methodologic reporting of EGS studies using ACS-NSQIP remains suboptimal. Future efforts should focus on improving adherence to the policies to mitigate potential sources of bias and improve the credibility of large database studies.

Reduced chronic pain: Another benefit of recovery at an inpatient rehabilitation facility over a skilled nursing facility?

BACKGROUND: We sought to compare outcomes 6-12 months post-injury between patients discharged to an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) and a skilled nursing facility (SNF). METHODS: Trauma patients admitted to 3 Level-I trauma centers were interviewed to evaluate the presence of daily pain requiring medication, functional outcomes, and physical and mental health-related quality-of-life at 6-12 months post-injury. Inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighting (IPTW)-adjusted analyses were performed to compare outcomes between patients who were discharged to IRF vs SNF. RESULTS: A total of 519 patients were included: 389 discharged to IRFs and 130 to SNFs. In adjusted analyses, IRF was associated with a significant reduction in the likelihood of chronic pain after injury (28.3% vs. 44.7%; OR:0.49; 95% CI, 0.26-0.91; P = .02). However, there were no significant differences in functional outcome or SF-12 composite scores between groups. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that injured patients discharged to an IRF as compared to a SNF had less chronic pain and analgesic use.

Pain or No Pain, We Will Give You Opioids: Relationship Between Number of Opioid Pills Prescribed and Severity of Pain after Operation in US vs Non-US Patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients in the US receive disproportionally higher amounts of opioids after operations compared with their non-US counterparts. We aimed to assess the relationship between perceived pain severity after operation and the amount of opioid medications prescribed at discharge in US vs non-US patients. METHODS: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of the International Patterns of Opioid Prescribing multicenter study. Patients 16 years and older who underwent appendectomy, cholecystectomy, or inguinal herniorrhaphy in 1 of 14 participating hospitals across 8 countries between October 2016 and March 2017 were included. In hospitals where pain severity was assessed using a 0 to 10 visual analog scale before hospital discharge, patients were stratified into the following groups, depending on the pain severity: none, mild (1 to 3), moderate (4 to 6), and severe (7 to 10). The number of opioid prescriptions, total number of pills, and oral morphine equivalents prescribed were calculated for each group and US and non-US patients were compared. RESULTS: A total of 2,024 patients were included. Eighty-three percent of US patients without pain were prescribed opioids compared with 8.7% of non-US patients without pain (p < 0.001). The number of opioid prescriptions, number of pills, and oral morphine equivalents prescribed were similar across the 4 pain severity groups in US patients (p > 0.05). In contrast, the number of opioid prescriptions, number of opioid pills, and oral morphine equivalents prescribed among non-US patients were incrementally higher as the pain severity progressed from no pain to severe pain (all, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: US patients are prescribed opioids at high rates and doses regardless of pain severity. Additional efforts should be directed toward tailoring opioid prescriptions to patients' needs.

Comparison of outcomes in non-head injured trauma patients using pre-injury warfarin or direct oral anticoagulant therapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients on prehospital anticoagulation with warfarin or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) represent a vulnerable subset of the trauma population. While protocolized warfarin reversal is widely available and easily implemented, prehospital anticoagulation with DOAC is cost prohibitive with only a few reversal options. This study aims to compare hospital outcomes of non-head injured trauma patients taking pre-injury DOAC versus warfarin. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study at a level 1 trauma center was performed. All adult trauma patients with pre-injury anticoagulation admitted between January 2015 and December 2018, were stratified into DOAC-using and warfarin-using groups. Patients were excluded if they had traumatic brain injury (TBI). Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed. Outcomes measures included in-hospital mortality, blood transfusion requirements, ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS and discharge disposition. RESULTS: 374 non-TBI trauma patients on anticoagulation were identified, of which 134 were on DOACs and 240 on warfarin. Patients on DOACs had a higher ISS (9 [IQR, 9-10] vs. 9 [IQR, 5-9]; p<0.001), and lower admission INR values (1.2 [IQR, 1.1-1.3] vs 2.4 [IQR, 1.8-2.7]; p<0.001) than warfarin users. Use of reversal agents was higher in warfarin users (p<0.001). Relative to warfarin, DOAC users did not differ significantly with respect to hospital mortality (OR 0.47, 95% CI [0.13-1.73]). Multivariable analysis (not possible for mortality) did not show significant difference for RBC transfusion requirements (OR 0.92 [0.51-1.67]), ICU LOS (OR 1.08 [0.53-2.19]), hospital LOS (OR 1.10 [0.70-1.74]) or discharge disposition (OR 0.56 [0.29-1.11]) between the groups. CONCLUSION: Despite lower reversal rates and higher ISS, non-TBI trauma patients with pre-injury DOAC use had similar outcomes as patients on pre-injury warfarin. There may be equipoise to have larger, prospective studies evaluating the comparative safety of DOACs and warfarin in the population prone to low energy fall type injuries.

Fresh Frozen Plasma-to-Packed Red Blood Cell Ratio and Mortality in Traumatic Hemorrhage: Nationwide Analysis of 4,427 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Despite the presence of highly reliable data, studies on packed red blood cells (pRBC):fresh frozen plasma (FFP) ratio suffer from limited sample size and the presence of survivor bias. We sought to study the association between FFP:pRBC and early mortality in the hemorrhaging trauma patient. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective nationwide cohort that included all TQIP participating hospitals (2013 to 2016). We included all trauma patients who were transfused ≥10 pRBCs and ≥1 FFP within 24 hours. We excluded transferred patients and those who died in the emergency department or had missing/inaccurate transfusion data. Patients were assigned to 7 FFP:pRBC cohorts (range 1:1 to 1:6, and 1:6+) only if the ratio was similar at 4 and 24 hours and, to avoid survival bias, were excluded otherwise. Multivariable analyses correcting for all available confounders (age, demographics, comorbidities, vital signs, Injury Severity Score [ISS] and mechanism, procedures performed) were derived to study the independent relationship between FFP:pRBC and 24-hour mortality. RESULTS: Of 1,002,595 patients, 4,427 patients were included. Mean age was 41 years, 79% were males, 61% had blunt trauma, and median ISS was 29. Most patients were transfused in a 1:1, 1:2, or 1:3 ratio (31%, 41%, and 11%, respectively); mortality ranged between 28% for 1:1 and 62% for 1:4. In multivariable analyses, the odds of mortality independently and incrementally increased to 1.23 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.48) for a 1:2 ratio, 2.11 (95% CI 1.42 to 3.13) for 1:4, and as high as 4.11 (95% CI 2.31 to 7.31) for 1:5 (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A 1:1 FFP:pRBC ratio is associated with the lowest mortality in the hemorrhaging trauma patient, and mortality increases with decreasing ratios.

Design and Impact of a Novel Surgery-Specific Second Victim Peer Support Program.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons are prone to feelings of sadness, guilt, and anxiety when involved in major adverse events. We aimed to create and evaluate a second victim peer support program for surgeons and surgical trainees. STUDY DESIGN: The second victim peer support program was an intervention performed in the Department of Surgery at a tertiary care academic medical center. Surgical attendings and trainees participated as peer supporters or affected peers. In this article, we describe the design of the program and its 1-year impact, which was evaluated through the number of interventions attempted and realized and feedback received from all participants using an anonymous qualitative and quantitative survey. RESULTS: The program was established using the following 5 steps: creation of a conceptual framework, choice of peer supporters, training of peer supporters, multifaceted identification of major adverse events, and design of a systematic intervention plan. In 1 year, the program had 47 interventions distributed evenly between attendings and trainees; 19% of affected peers opted out of receiving support. Most participants expressed satisfaction with the program's confidentiality, the safe/trusting environment it provided, and the timeliness of the intervention (89%, 73%, and 83%, respectively); 81% suggested that the program had a positive impact on the department's "safety and support" culture and would recommend the program to a colleague. Several areas for improvement were identified, including the need to improve identification of events requiring outreach, and the desire for increased awareness of the program throughout the department. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully designed, implemented, and assessed the impact of the first surgery-specific peer support program in the US. Our 1-year experience suggests that the program is highly used and well received, albeit with opportunities for improvement.

Hartmann's Procedure vs Primary Anastomosis with Diverting Loop Ileostomy for Acute Diverticulitis: Nationwide Analysis of 2,729 Emergency Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: Recent small randomized trials suggest that primary anastomosis with a diverting loop ileostomy (PADLI) is a safe alternative to Hartmann's procedure (HP) for patients with acute diverticulitis necessitating emergent operation. We sought to examine the 30-day outcomes of patients undergoing emergent HP vs PADLI. METHOD: Using the American College of Surgeons NSQIP Colectomy Procedure Targeted Database from 2012 to 2016, all patients with acute diverticulitis who underwent emergent HP or PADLI were identified. Multivariable logistic models were constructed to compare the 30-day mortality, overall morbidity, and individual postoperative complications (eg surgical site infection, bleeding, sepsis) of the 2 procedures, controlling for all preoperative variables (eg demographics, comorbidities, laboratory values, illness severity), as well as intraoperative and procedure-specific variables (eg wound classification). RESULTS: Of 130,963 patients, 2,729 patients were included. Median age was 64 years, 48.5% were male; the majority of patients underwent HP and only 208 (7.6%) underwent PADLI. Hartmann's procedure patients had more comorbidities (eg COPD: 9.8% vs 4.8%; p = 0.017), were more functionally dependent (6.3% vs 2.4%; p = 0.025), and were sicker (eg septic shock: 11.1% vs 5.3%; p = 0.015) compared with PADLI patients. The mortality rates for HP vs PADLI were 7.6% and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.011). The morbidity rates were 55.4% and 48.6%, respectively (p = 0.056). In multivariable analyses, compared with HP, PADLI did not result in increased rates of mortality (odds ratio 0.21; 95% CI 0.03 to 1.58; p = 0.129) or morbidity (odds ratio 0.96; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.45; p = 0.834). The odds of most major postoperative complications were also similar for HP and PADLI overall. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, surgeons perform HP more frequently than PADLI. When controlling for patient population differences, PADLI appears to be at least a safe alternative to HP for select patient populations needing emergent surgical management of acute diverticulitis.

Do Not Blame the Resident: the Impact of Surgeon and Surgical Trainee Experience on the Occurrence of Intraoperative Adverse Events (iAEs) in Abdominal Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are defined as inadvertent injuries that occur during an operation and are associated with increased mortality, morbidity, and health care costs. We sought to study the impact of attending surgeon experience as well as resident training level on the occurrence of iAEs. DESIGN: The institutional American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and administrative databases for abdominal surgeries were linked and screened for iAEs using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification-based Patient Safety Indicator "accidental puncture/laceration." Each flagged record was systematically reviewed to confirm iAE occurrence and determine the number of years of independent practice of the attending surgeon and the postgraduate year (PGY) of the assisting resident at the time of the operation. The attending surgeon experience was divided into quartiles (<6 years, 6-13 years, 13-20 years, >20 years). The resident experience level was defined as Junior (PGY-1 to PGY-3) or Senior (PGY-4 or PGY-5). Univariate/bivariate then multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, and operation type and/or complexity (using RVUs as a proxy) were performed to assess the independent impact of resident and attending surgeon experience on the occurrence of iAEs. SETTING: A large tertiary care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients included in the 2007-2012 ACS-NSQIP that had an abdominal surgery performed by both an attending surgeon and a resident. RESULTS: A total of 7685 operations were included and iAEs were detected in 159 of them (2.1%). Junior residents participated in 1680 cases (21.9%), while senior residents were involved in 6005 (78.1%). The iAE rates for attending surgeons with <6, 6-13, 13-20, and >20 years of experience were 2.7%, 1.7%, 2.4%, and 1.4%, respectively. In multivariable analyses, the risk of occurrence of an iAE was significantly decreased for surgeons with >20 years of experience compared to those with <6 years of experience (odds ratio=0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.32-0.86, p = 0.011). On bivariate analyses, iAEs occurred in 1.2% of junior resident cases, while senior residents had an iAE rate of 2.3%. However, after risk adjustment on multivariable analyses, the resident experience level did not significantly impact the rate of iAEs. CONCLUSIONS: The surgeon's level of experience, but not the resident's, is associated with the occurrence of iAEs in abdominal surgery. Efforts to improve patient safety in surgery should explore the value of pairing junior surgeons with the more experienced ones thru formalized coaching programs, rather than focus on curbing resident operative autonomy.

Preoperative evaluation of penetrating esophageal trauma in the current era: An analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative diagnostic evaluation (PDE) of penetrating esophageal injury (PeEsIn) can delay treatment and increase morbidity. We sought to study the relationship among PDE, delay in definitive treatment, and patient mortality in PeEsIn. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 2008-2010 National Trauma Data Banks were queried for PeEsIn. Exclusion criteria were death within 1 day of injury, and missing data about survival to discharge or operative intervention. Data extracted included demographics, vital signs, injury severity, diagnostic procedures (endoscopy, computed tomography, and fluoroscopy), time to procedures and/or operation, hospital-free days, and mortality. RESULTS: Of 280 patients, 75 underwent PDE and 205 did not. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics, vital signs or injury severity between the two groups. The median time to the first operation was shorter in the nonPDE cohort compared to the PDE cohort (2 vs. 3 h; P = 0.018). Median hospital-free days at day 60 were significantly less in nonPDE (42 days, interquartile range ([IQR] = [28, 50]) versus PDE patients (47 days, IQR = [38, 51]) (P = 0.007). Mortality was not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: PDE in PeEsIn slightly delays the time to operation without worsening mortality, and is a predictor of more hospital-free days.