Major trauma patients and their outcomes - A retrospective observational study of critical care trauma admissions to a trauma unit with special services.

INTRODUCTION: International data describes a changing pattern to trauma over the last decade, with an increasingly comorbid population presenting challenges to trauma management and resources. In Ireland, resource provision and management of trauma is being transformed to deliver a trauma network, in line with international best practice. Our hospital plays a crucial role within this network and is designated a Trauma Unit with Specialist Services (TUSS) to distinguish it from standard trauma units. METHODS: This study aims to describe the characteristics of patients and injuries and assess trends in mortality rates. It is a retrospective observational study of adult ICU trauma admissions from August 2010 to July 2021. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 30-days, 90-days, and 1 year. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, disposition, and complications. Patients were categorised by age, injury severity score (ISS), and mechanism of injury. RESULTS: In all, 709 patients were identified for final analysis. Annual admissions doubled since 2010/11, with a trough of 41 admissions, increasing to peak at 95 admissions in 2017/18. Blunt trauma accounted for 97.6% of cases. Falls <2 m (45.4%) and RTAs (29.2%) were the main mechanisms of injury. Polytrauma comprised 41.9% of admissions. Traumatic brain injury accounted for 30.2% of cases; 18.8% of these patients were transferred to a neurosurgical centre. The majority of patients, 58.1%, were severely injured (ISS ≥ 16). Patients ≥ 65 years of age accounted for 45.7% of admissions, with falls <2 m their primary mechanism of injury. The primary outcome of all-cause mortality reduced with an absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 8.0% (95% CI: -8.37%, 24.36%), 12.9% (95% CI: -4.19%, 29.94%) and 8.2% (95% CI: -9.64%, 26.09%) for 30-day, 90-day and 1-year respectively. Regression analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality for 30-days and 90-days post presentation to hospital (P-values of 0.018, 0.033 and 0.152 for 30-day, 90-day and 1-year respectively). CONCLUSION: The burden of major trauma in our hospital is considerable and increasing over time. Substantial changes in demographics, injury mechanism and mortality were seen, with outcomes improving over time. This is consistent with international data where trauma systems have been adopted.

Traumatic brain injury incidence and mortality: a large population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a severe condition that represents a major global public health concern. OBJECTIVES: Provide a comprehensive epidemiological outlook encompassing TBI incidence, healthcare provision and mortality. METHODS: Population-based study in Veneto (4.9 million inhabitants), Italy, from 2012 to 2021. Hospital discharge and mortality records were used to assess incidence and mortality. Kaplan-Meier survival estimator and Cox regression models were fitted to investigate determinants of mortality. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2021, there were 37,487 incident TBI cases, corresponding to an age-standardized rate of 77.30/100,000 people (95% CI 76.52-78.09), higher among males, with an exponential growth after age 70. Leading causes were domestic (33.1%) and traffic accidents (17.7%), the first predominating among the elderly and children, while the latter in males 15-24 and older people. After rates stably declined between 2012 and 2019, the study captured a sharp decrease especially for traffic and occupational accidents in males, due to COVID-19 lockdown in 2020. Overall, 48.9% TBI patients were hospitalized in a specialized trauma center, with 2.6% requiring a transfer after accessing a spoke hospital. Over a 3.7 years median follow-up, 16,145 deaths were recorded, with higher mortality for those undergoing neurosurgical interventions, regardless of their access point. Risks of death increased with age, male gender, and comorbidities. DISCUSSION: TBI incidence is characterized by distinct patterns, affecting particularly older individuals and males. Minimal hospital transfers with comparable survival irrespective of access point suggests an effective patient management within the network. The study underscores the critical need for acute-phase support and prolonged care strategies for older TBI patients.

Quad bike related trauma in Ireland.

INTRODUCTION: A quad bike or an all-terrain vehicle is a four-wheeled powered vehicle generally designed for off-road use. They are widely used for farm-related work and more recently for recreational purposes. The potential for serious injury and death with quad bike use is a growing public health concern. There is an inherent instability in their design and they are typically used on rugged terrain characterised by dangerous driving surfaces. This study examines quad bike related trauma in Ireland using a national trauma registry to identify patient demographics, injury mechanism and type, treatments received and outcomes. METHODS: All quad bike related trauma cases recorded on the Major Trauma Audit (MTA), National Office of Clinical Audit in Ireland for the period 2014-2019 were gathered and analysed. RESULTS: There were 69 cases identified and 63 (91 %) of these were male. The median (IQR) age was 27 (19 - 49.1). There were 25 % (n = 17) aged 0-18 years, 64 % (n = 44) aged 19-65 and 12 % (n = 8) aged greater than 65 years. The median injury severity score (ISS) was 10 (IQR 9-22). The most severely injured body region was the head (n = 21, 30 %). No helmet use was recorded in 50 % (n = 34) of cases. October recorded the highest number of cases (n = 9, 13 %), and Sunday was the most common day (n = 17, 25 %). The median length of hospital stay was five days (IQR 3-9). One patient died after arrival to hospital. CONCLUSION: Quad bike related trauma predominantly affects a young male cohort with serious injury characteristics. A sizeable proportion of patients are under 18 years of age. This data can better inform national policies and public awareness campaigns targeting this trauma subset. The head was the most common severely injured body region, highlighting the potential need for legislative intervention regarding mandatory helmet use. A large cohort of patients required transfer for definitive care which has implications for trauma care pathways and advocates for the development of an integrated trauma system in Ireland.

Identifying the severely injured benefitting from a specific level of trauma care in an inclusive network: A multicentre retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Defining major trauma (MT) with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15 has limitations. This threshold is used for concentrating MT care in networks with multiple levels of trauma care. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify subgroups of severely injured patients benefiting on in-hospital mortality and non-fatal clinical outcome measures in an optimal level of trauma care. METHODS: A multicentre retrospective cohort study on data of the Dutch National Trauma Registry, region South West, from January 1, 2015 until December 31, 2019 was conducted. Patients ≥ 16 years admitted within 48 h after trauma transported with (H)EMS to a level I trauma centre (TC) or a non-level I trauma facility with a Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (MAIS) ≥ 3 were included. Patients with burns or patients of ≥ 65 years with an isolated hip fracture were excluded. Logistic regression models were used for comparing level I with non-level I. Subgroup analysis were done for MT patients (ISS > 15) and non-MT patients (ISS 9-14). RESULTS: A total of 7,493 records were included. In-hospital mortality of patients admitted to a non-level I trauma facility did not differ significantly from patients admitted to the level I TC (adjusted Odds Ratio (OR): 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-1.30). This was also applicable for MT patients (OR: 1.06; 95% CI 0.73-1.53) and non-MT patients (OR: 1.30; 95% CI (0.56-3.03). Hospital and ICU LOS were significantly shorter for patients admitted to a non-level I trauma facilities, and patients admitted to a non-level I trauma facility were more likely to be discharged home. Findings were confirmed for MT and non-MT patients, per injured body region. CONCLUSION: All levels of trauma care performed equally on in-hospital mortality among severely injured patients (MAIS ≥ 3), although patients admitted to the level I TC were more severely injured. Subgroups of patients by body region or ISS, with a survival benefit or more favorable clinical outcome measures were not identified. Subgroups analysis on clinical outcome measures across different levels of trauma care in an inclusive trauma network is too simplistic if subgroups are based on injuries in specific body region or ISS only.

[Analysis of a differentiated resuscitation room activation at a national trauma center]. / Analyse einer differenzierten Schockraumalarmierung an einem überregionalen Traumazentrum.

BACKGROUND: In order to continue to efficiently provide both personnel-intensive and resource-intensive care to severely injured patients, some hospitals have introduced individually differentiated systems for resuscitation room treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the concept of the A and B classifications in terms of practicability, indications, and potential complications at a national trauma center in Bavaria. METHODS: In a retrospective study, data from resuscitation room trauma patients in the year 2020 were collected. The assignment to A and B was made by the prehospital emergency physician. Parameters such as the injury severity score (ISS), Glasgow outcome scale (GOS), upgrade rate, and the indication criteria according to the S3 guidelines were recorded. Statistical data comparisons were made using t­tests, χ2-tests, or Mann-Whitney U­tests. RESULTS: A total of 879 resuscitation room treatments (A 473, B 406) met the inclusion criteria. It was found that 94.5% of resuscitation room A cases had physician accompaniment, compared to 48% in resuscitation room B assignments. In addition to significantly lower ISS scores (4.1 vs. 13.9), 29.8% of B patients did not meet the treatment criteria defined in the S3 guidelines. With a low upgrade rate of 4.9%, 98% of B patients had a GOS score of 4 or 5. CONCLUSION: The presented categorization is an effective and safe way to manage the increasing number of resuscitation room alerts in a resource-optimized manner.

Development and Validation of a New Tool to Improve the Accuracy of the Hospital Mass-Casualty Incident Response Plan Activation: The PEMAAF Score.

INTRODUCTION: Effective response to a mass-casualty incident (MCI) entails the activation of hospital MCI plans. Unfortunately, there are no tools available in the literature to support hospital responders in predicting the proper level of MCI plan activation. This manuscript describes the scientific-based approach used to develop, test, and validate the PEMAAF score (Proximity, Event, Multitude, Overcrowding, Temporary Ward Reduction Capacity, Time Shift Slot [Prossimità, Evento, Moltitudine, Affollamento, Accorpamento, Fascia Oraria], a tool able to predict the required level of hospital MCI plan activation and to facilitate a coordinated activation of a multi-hospital network. METHODS: Three study phases were performed within the Metropolitan City of Milan, Italy: (1) retrospective analysis of past MCI after action reports (AARs); (2) PEMAAF score development; and (3) PEMAAF score validation. The validation phase entailed a multi-step process including two retrospective analyses of past MCIs using the score, a focus group discussion (FGD), and a prospective simulation-based study. Sensitivity and specificity of the score were analyzed using a regression model, Spearman's Rho test, and receiver operating characteristic/ROC analysis curves. RESULTS: Results of the retrospective analysis and FGD were used to refine the PEMAAF score, which included six items-Proximity, Event, Multitude, Emergency Department (ED) Overcrowding, Temporary Ward Reduction Capacity, and Time Shift Slot-allowing for the identification of three priority levels (score of 5-6: green alert; score of 7-9: yellow alert; and score of 10-12: red alert). When prospectively analyzed, the PEMAAF score determined most frequent hospital MCI plan activation (>10) during night and holiday shifts, with a score of 11 being associated with a higher sensitivity system and a score of 12 with higher specificity. CONCLUSIONS: The PEMAAF score allowed for a balanced and adequately distributed response in case of MCI, prompting hospital MCI plan activation according to real needs, taking into consideration the whole hospital response network.

Addressing the Mental Health Challenges of Refugees-A Regional Network-Based Approach in Middle Hesse Germany.

Refugees constitute a vulnerable group with an increased risk of developing trauma-related disorders. From a clinician's integrative perspective, navigating the detrimental impact of the social, economic, structural, and political factors on the mental health of refugees is a daily experience. Therefore, a collective effort must be made to reduce health inequities. The authors developed a treatment concept which provides broader care structures within a scientific practitioner's approach. The resulting "Trauma Network" addresses the structural challenges for refugees in Middle Hesse. Accompanying research provided a sound basis for further discussions with policy-makers to improve the situation for refugees in the short- and long-term.

[Safety aspects, emergency preparedness and hazard prevention in hospitals concerning mass casualty incidents (MCI)/terror-related MCI : Prospects on future challenges based on survey results from the 3rd emergency conference of the DGU]. / Sicherheitsaspekte und Vorbereitung zur Notfallvorsorge und Gefahrenabwehr in Kliniken bei MANV/TerrorMANV : Ausblick auf zukünftige Herausforderungen anhand von Umfrageergebnissen zur 3. Notfallkonferenz der DGU.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide terrorist activities since "9/11" and subsequently also in the European region have led to a rethinking in the context of the evaluation of critical infrastructure in Germany, also with respect to security at and in hospitals. OBJECTIVE: This publication deals with the evaluation of existing concepts on topics such as "alerting", "security", "communication" and "preparation" in the aforementioned context. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Based on a literature review as well as a survey among participants of the 3rd emergency conference of the DGU (German Society for Trauma Surgery), this topic and the currently existing situation are further analyzed and presented. RESULTS: The data obtained illustrate that while the majority of hospitals have a hospital alert and response planning, the frequency of updates and intrahospital communication to increase awareness show significant variation. Furthermore, the results illustrate a heterogeneity of the existing intrahospital alerting concepts as well as a lack of security concepts and cooperation with security and guard services. Furthermore, it is evident that the topic of a possible CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear) threat is not yet adequately perceived or implemented in the risk analysis. DISCUSSION: The latent threat of terrorist activities appears to have led German hospitals to address the issue of hospital alarm and response planning in their assessment as critical infrastructure and to have implemented this for the most part; however, the subordinated areas and the consequences that can be derived from alarm planning do not yet show the necessary stringency to ultimately ensure adequate responses in these special scenarios with respect to security in and at German hospitals.

Resource utilisation for patients brought to a major trauma centre by helicopter.

BACKGROUND: Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) allow critical care personnel to attend incidents alongside transporting patients to hospital. The study site is a UK based emergency department and major trauma centre, accepting flights from a wide geographical area. AIMS: To characterise the impact of HEMS on a major trauma centre clinical resources and the impact of the UK regional trauma network launch on HEMS asset provision. METHODS: Flight case-mix data were obtained from Emergency Department (ED) records (non-trauma patients) and from the Trauma Audit and Research Network database (trauma patients). Statistical analysis was in Excel. RESULTS: 432 flights landed at the site between August 2018 and July 2019. 178 flights originated from the incident scene (145 trauma, 26 non-trauma), 107 from other hospitals, and 5 to other hospitals. Hospitalisation was reduced to a median of 6 days. CONCLUSIONS: Primary HEMS trauma patients utilised significant clinical resources but had shorter hospitalisations than those without HEMS intervention. The regional trauma network improved HEMS tasking and utilised critical car cars to provide advanced pre-hospital care locally. Further work should compare HEMS versus ground ambulance to determine the impact of HEMS on patient outcomes and cost implications to both HEMS operators and receiving hospital.

[Requirements for trauma rehabilitation centers : Post-acute rehabilitation (phase C) after severe trauma injury]. / Anforderungen an Traumarehabilitationszentren : Postakute Rehabilitation (Phase C) nach schwerer Unfallverletzung.

Severely injured patients need a qualified and seamless rehabilitation after the end of the acute treatment. This post-acute rehabilitation (phase C) places high demands on the rehabilitation facility in terms of personnel, material, organizational and spatial requirements.The working group on trauma rehabilitation of the German Society for Orthopedics and Traumatology e. V. (DGOU) and other experts have agreed on requirements for post-acute phase C rehabilitation for seriously injured people. These concern both the personnel and material requirements for a highly specialized orthopedic trauma surgery trauma rehabilitation as well as the demands on processes, organization and quality assurance.A seamless transition to the follow-up and further treatment of seriously injured people in the TraumaNetzwerk DGU® is ensured through a high level of qualification and the corresponding infrastructure of supraregional trauma rehabilitation centers. This also places new demands on the TraumaZentren DGU®. Only if these are met can the treatment and rehabilitation of seriously injured people be optimized.

Paediatric major trauma in the setting of the Irish trauma network.

BACKGROUND: The construction of a new tertiary children's hospital and reconfiguration of its two satellite centres will become the Irish epicentre for all paediatric care including paediatric trauma. Ireland is also currently establishing a national trauma network although further planning of how to manage paediatric trauma in the context of this system is required. This research defines the unknown epidemiology of paediatric major trauma in Ireland to assist strategic planning of a future paediatric major trauma network. METHODS: Data from 1068 paediatric trauma cases was extracted from a longitudinal series of annual cross-sectional studies collected by the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN). All paediatric patients between the ages of 0-16 suffering AIS ≥2 injuries in Ireland between 2014-2018 were included. Demographics, injury patterns, hospital care processes and outcomes were analysed. RESULTS: Children were most commonly injured at home (45.1%) or in public places/roads (40.1%). The most frequent mechanisms of trauma were falls <2 m (36.8%) followed by RTAs (24.3%). Limb injuries followed by head injuries were the most often injured body parts. The proportion of head injuries in those aged <1 year is double that of any other age group. Only 21% of patients present directly to a children's hospital and 46% require transfer. Consultant-led emergency care is currently delivered to 41.5% of paediatric major trauma patients, there were 555 (48.2%) patients who required operative intervention and 22.8% who required critical care admission. A significant number of children in Ireland aged 1-5 years die from asphyxia/drowning. The overall mortality rate was 3.8% and was significantly associated with the presence of head injuries (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Paediatric Trauma represents a significant childhood burden of mortality and morbidity in Ireland. There are currently several sub-optimal elements of paediatric trauma service delivery that will benefit from the establishment of a trauma network. This research will help guide prevention strategy, policy-making and workforce planning during the establishment of an Irish paediatric trauma network and will act as a benchmark for future comparison studies after the network is implemented.

[Competence, creativity and communication: basics for quality improvement in traumatology : Reality and future challenges]. / Kompetenz, Kreativität und Kommunikation: Grundlagen zur Qualitätsverbesserung in der Traumatologie : Realität und Herausforderung der Zukunft.

Interdisciplinary collaboration is one of the key factors for successful treatment of patients with complex injuries and diseases. Hence, several innovative concepts have been initiated to improve the treatment quality within the field of trauma surgery. The implementation of a ward pharmacist with the daily discussion of prescribed medications shows a reduction of side effects, costs for medicaments and the use of antibiotics. An interdisciplinary and multimodal delirium team was introduced and every patient over the age of 65 years was screened for the risk of perioperative and postoperative delirium, the medication was adjusted and expert advice was available in the case of acute delirium. Corresponding to the well-established tumor boards, an interdisciplinary musculoskeletal conference to decide on the treatment of complex interdisciplinary injuries of the musculoskeletal system should be established. The future challenges will include the digital connection of hospitals within the already existing trauma networks in order to provide rapid access to this interdisciplinary expertise also outside maximum care hospitals.

Quality of life after multiple trauma: results from a patient cohort treated in a certified trauma network.

PURPOSE: Besides mortality, the patient-reported outcome (PRO) in survivors of multiple trauma is of increasing interest. So far, no data on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after multiple trauma from an entire trauma network are available. Within this study, the course of the PRO over time and differences between level I and level II trauma centers within an entire trauma network was evaluated. METHODS: Multiple injured patients, treated in a rural trauma network over 2 years, were prospectively included in this study. After 6, 12 and 24 months the results of the European Quality of Life (EuroQoL) EQ-5D outcome instrument were evaluated. To adjust for differences in trauma severity between level I and level II centers, the Revised Injury Severity Classification II (RISC II) and the Functional Capacity Index (FCI) were used to adjust the life-quality results of patients. RESULTS: 501 patients were included, 118 patients with an ISS < 16 points, 383 patients reached 16 points or more. Despite a steady increase of EQ-5D index over time (6 months: 0.71 ± 0.31; 12 months: 0.74 ± 0.28; 24 months: 0.76 ± 0.27; p < 0.001), the values of a reference population could not be reached even 2 years after trauma (EQ-5D reference population: 0.9). After adjustment for trauma severity, no significant differences in PROMs between level I and level II centers could be detected (p = 0.188). CONCLUSION: The consistently low EQ-5D index relative the reference population and the lack of a difference between level I and II centers suggest that improved strategies for polytrauma aftercare are called for.

The London Major Trauma Network System: A Literature Review.

Trauma is one of the leading causes of death and disability worldwide and is a major global public health problem. The provision of trauma care has been substandard in England and Wales prior to the implementation of an inclusive major trauma network system in London in 2010 and subsequently across the rest of England two years later. The implementation of the London trauma system has brought about improvements to the delivery of trauma care by decreasing the overall morbidity and mortality significantly. This framework encompasses the collaboration of emergency services, designated Major Trauma Centres (MTCs), Trauma Units (TUs) and community providers which have been optimized with the expertise and resources to provide the best outcomes for major trauma patients. Specific triage protocols, consultant-led trauma service and on-the-spot access to radiology services and operating theatres have played a pivotal role in the improvement of trauma care. In spite of several strengths, however, the London major trauma network system is by no means without its limitations. The emergence of the new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created major barriers to the smooth running of trauma services by exhausting resources due to infection control measures, reduced theatre space and re-deployment of medical staffs. In addition, the cancellation of elective surgeries has impacted directly on the training of surgical trainees by leaving them with significantly reduced surgical exposure. As a results of this ever changing surgical landscape, a need to urgently review these traditional surgical training methods with a view to modernize the curriculum. Although the London trauma system has evolved significantly since its implementation, its limitations should be recognized and addressed to enhance performance and improve patient outcomes.

Validity of the Best Practice Tariff in paediatric major trauma: A retrospective cohort study from a level 1 children's major trauma centre.

INTRODUCTION: The Best Practice Tariff (BPT) in major trauma awards Major Trauma Centres (MTCs) a financial incentive when predefined standards of care are met. However, no tailored criteria exist with regards to the reimbursement policy in paediatric major trauma. In this study, we aim to examine the utility of the paediatric Major Trauma BPT and identify predictors of additional resource utilisation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cohort study encompassed all paediatric major trauma calls (N = 682) presenting to a designated combined adult and paediatric MTC between July 2014 and June 2017. Patient demographics, admission pattern, injury parameters, length of stay (LOS) and the need for operative management were collected. Patients approved for the BPT uplift payment (BPT group) were compared with the cohort of children not qualifying (non-BPT group). RESULTS: Overall, less than a quarter (23.2%) of the trauma population qualified for the BPT. The proportion of patients requiring operative intervention and CT scanning in the BPT group was significantly higher (p<0.001). These children also attained a higher ISS (median, 13.5 vs. 0, p <0.001) and required longer hospitalisation. Following a Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, a cut off ISS score > 8 demonstrated an excellent predictive value in identifying children qualifying for BPT (true positive and false positive rates: 90% and 10.7%). However, a subgroup analysis including the more severely injured children (ISS >8) not qualifying for the uplift payment revealed that equally substantial resource went into their management - 42.9% needed surgical intervention and 57.1% a CT scan. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrated that BPT in paediatric major trauma is a valuable reimbursement; however, our findings also unveiled a cohort deemed ineligible for BPT despite the high costs accrued. Re-evaluation of the remuneration criteria of paediatric major trauma networks with an alternative, more inclusive reimbursement policy is needed.

Which factors influence the decision to transfer patients with traumatic brain injury to a neurosurgery unit in a major trauma network?

Objectives: Within the pan London Major Trauma System many patients with minor or non-life threatening traumatic brain injury (TBI) remain at their local hospital and are not transferred to a major trauma centre (MTC). Our aim was to identify factors that influence the decision to transfer patients with TBI to a neurosurgical centre.Methods: This is a single centre prospective cohort study of all patients with TBI referred to our neurosurgery unit from regional acute hospitals over a 4-month period (Sept 2016-Jan 2017). Our primary outcome was transferred to a neurosurgical centre. We identified the following factors that may predict decision to transfer: patient demographics, transfer distance, antithrombotic therapy and severity of TBI based on initial Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and Marshall CT score. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed.Results: A total of 339 patients were referred from regional hospitals with TBI and of these, 53 (15.6%) were transferred to our hospital. The mean age of patients referred was 70.6 years, 62.5% were men and 43% on antithrombotic drugs. Eighty-six percent of patients had mild TBI (GCS 13-15) on initial assessment and 79% had a Marshall CT score of 2. The adjusted analysis revealed only higher age, higher Marshall Score, the presence of chronic subdural haematoma (CSDH), the presence of contusion(s) and fracture(s) predicted transfer (p<.05). Subgroup analysis consistently showed a higher Marshall score predicted transfer (p<.05).Conclusions: In our cohort higher Marshall score consistently predicted transfer to our neurosurgical centre. Presenting GCS, transfer distance and antithrombotic therapy did not influence decision to transfer.

Pre-hospital emergency medicine and the trauma intensive care unit.

The system of trauma care has been revolutionised over the last decade with the introduction of major trauma networks across the United Kingdom and the development of subspecialist national training in pre-hospital emergency medicine. Pre-hospital care providers feed trauma patients into trauma units or major trauma centres depending upon the severity of their injuries and their stability for a potentially longer primary transfer to access specialist major trauma services. Trauma services are continually adapting and improving with the introduction of more advanced techniques into the pre-hospital arena are on the horizon, enabling trauma patients to receive more specialised treatment from medical professionals earlier after injury; this article will discuss some of the recent developments within pre-hospital emergency medicine, in-hospital trauma care and on into the intensive care unit, and how this has led to improved outcomes.

Outcomes at non-trauma centres within a trauma referral network: A five-year retrospective cohort study from Australia.

OBJECTIVE: Describe major trauma activity and mortality within non-trauma centres within a single trauma referral network in New South Wales, Australia over a five-year period. DESIGN: Multi-centre retrospective cohort study. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of trauma patients presenting to non-trauma centres within a metropolitan major trauma referral network between January 2011 and June 2016. The outcome of interest examined was in-hospital mortality for major trauma (Injury Severity Score ISS>12), consistent with current state-wide trauma reporting guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 4827 trauma patients were identified from non-major trauma centres of which 352 (7.3%) had an ISS>12. The most common mechanisms were road trauma (54.6%) and falls (37.4%). The mortality with those ISS>12 was 9.3%. During the same period, the overall trauma mortality (ISS>12) at the Major Trauma Centre was similar at 10.2% (p=0.10). After adjusting for age and ISS differences between Major Trauma Centre and other facilities within the network, the odds of in-hospital mortality after major trauma (ISS>12) was higher in the Major Trauma Centre compared to other facilities within the same network (adjusted odds ratio 2.7; 95% CI 1.6, 4.7; p=0.0004). CONCLUSION: Across a single trauma referral network coordinated by a major trauma service, non-trauma centres account for around a quarter of total major trauma volume and adjusted mortality was lower in these centres compared to patients treated at major trauma centres.

[Multihospital use of imaging techniques in decentralized trauma care]. / Multihospitale Nutzung bildgebender Verfahren in der dezentralen Traumaversorgung.

BACKGROUND: Decentralized trauma care in the Wald and Weinviertel region in the north of lower Austria comprises five hospitals for primary care including one regional trauma center. Due to the geographical position and adverse weather conditions a web-based teleradiology system was established to ensure the best possible treatment and joint access to the results of radiological investigations. OBJECTIVE: The article describes a new picture archiving and communication system (PACS), which provides an online teleradiological workflow between the central trauma care unit and peripheral departments in a local trauma network as well as the advantages and disadvantages. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A corporately used PACS enables streaming-based full access to studies which are created within the system. Radiological studies can be obtained on request from all subscribers within the network. RESULTS: Teleradiological networks can essentially contribute to a suitable treatment pathway in an association of hospitals and therefore lead to a rapid initiation of treatment. CONCLUSION: Especially in rural areas with decentralized trauma care, the joint use of teleradiological resources can lead to a better treatment quality.

Early management of severe pelvic injury (first 24 hours).

OBJECTIVE: Pelvic fractures represent 5% of all traumatic fractures and 30% are isolated pelvic fractures. Pelvic fractures are found in 10 to 20% of severe trauma patients and their presence is highly correlated to increasing trauma severity scores. The high mortality of pelvic trauma, about 8 to 15%, is related to actively bleeding pelvic injuries and/or associated injuries to the head, abdomen or chest. Regardless of the severity of pelvic trauma, diagnosis and treatment must proceed according to a strategy that does not delay the management of the most severely injured patients. To date, in France, there are no guidelines issued by healthcare authorities or professional societies that address this subject. DESIGN: A consensus committee of 22 experts from the French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (Société Française d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation; SFAR) and the French Society of Emergency Medicine (Société Française de Médecine d'Urgence; SFMU) in collaboration with the French Society of Radiology (Société Française de Radiologie; SFR), French Defence Health Service (Service de Santé des Armées; SSA), French Society of Urology (Association Française d'Urologie; AFU), the French Society of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery (Société Française de Chirurgie Orthopédique et Traumatologique; SOCFCOT), and the French Society of Digestive Surgery (Société Française de Chirurgie digestive; SFCD) was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independently from any industry funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence. The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasised. METHODS: Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. The analysis of the literature and the recommendations were then conducted according to the GRADE® methodology. RESULTS: The SFAR Guideline panel provided 22 statements on prehospital and hospital management of the unstable patient with pelvic fracture. After three rounds of discussion and various amendments, a strong agreement was reached for 100% of recommendations. Of these recommendations, 11 have a high level of evidence (Grade 1 ± ), 11 have a low level of evidence (Grade 2 ± ). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial agreement exists among experts regarding many strong recommendations for management of the unstable patient with pelvic fracture.