Anticoagulated Trauma Patients: A Level I Trauma Center's Response to a Growing Geriatric Population.

BACKGROUND: Injured older adults often receive delayed care in the emergency department (ED) because they do not meet criteria for trauma team activation (TTA). This is particularly dangerous for the increasing number of patients taking anticoagulant or antiplatelet (AC/AP) medication at the time of injury. OBJECTIVES: The present study examined improvements in processes of care and triage accuracy when TTA criteria include an escalated response for older anticoagulated patients. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed at a Level I trauma center. The study population (referred to as A55) included patients aged 55 years or older who were taking an AC/AP medication at the time of injury. Study periods included 11 months prior to the criteria change (Phase 1: July 2013-May 2014; n = 107) and 11 months after the change (Phase 2: July 2014-May 2015; n = 211). Differences were assessed with Kruskal-Wallis and chi-squared tests. RESULTS: More A55 patients received a full or limited TTA after criteria were revised (70% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). Undertriage was reduced from 13% to 2% (p < 0.001). The trauma center significantly decreased time to first laboratory result, time to first computed tomography scan, and total time in ED prior to admission for A55 patients arriving from the scene of injury or by private vehicle. CONCLUSION: Criteria that escalated the trauma response for A55 patients led to reductions in undertriage for anticoagulated older adults, as well as more timely mobilization of important clinical resources.

Effective Hospital-Wide Education in Hemorrhage Control.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled hemorrhage is the leading cause of potentially preventable traumatic death. Bleeding victims must receive immediate medical attention to save lives, and the first opportunity to control bleeding after trauma often comes from bystanders. Educating the general public is important for improving outcomes for hemorrhaging victims, and it is imperative for all people, including those with no clinical training, to have the knowledge to respond until trained medical specialists arrive. STUDY DESIGN: An 8-minute educational module was deployed to all hospital employees and included information on the location and contents of hemorrhage control bags in the hospital and how to use the materials in the bags to respond to uncontrolled hemorrhage. A pre-post questionnaire was administered with the module to evaluate effectiveness. McNemar tests were used to compare the responses and evaluate effectiveness of the education. RESULTS: Eighty-four percent of eligible employees (n = 4,845) completed the module and all items on the questionnaires. Three-quarters of respondents provided direct or ancillary care to patients, and one-quarter worked in nonclinical roles. On average, 57% of questions were answered correctly in the pre-questionnaire and 98% were answered correctly in the post-questionnaire. The module was effective for all employees regardless of clinical training. CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no succinct hemorrhage control education available that can be deployed across a large workplace environment. Results demonstrate that the brief learning module was effective in educating all employees in the basics of hemorrhage control. The module could be deployed in clinical and nonclinical settings.

Is pain really undertreated? Challenges of addressing pain in trauma patients during prehospital transport and trauma resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: Prior research has documented the inadequacy of pain management for trauma patients in the emergency department (ED), with rates of pain assessment and opioid administration averaging about 50%. Such rates, however, may be misleading and do not adequately capture the complexity of pain management practices in a trauma population. The goal of the study was to determine if pain was undertreated at the study hospital or if patient acuity explained the timing and occurrence of pain treatment in the prehospital setting and the ED. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed at a Level 1 adult trauma centre in the Midwest. The trauma registry was used to identify patients who received a trauma activation during the study period (June-November 2012; N=313). Using the first set of patient vitals and ISS, patients were grouped into three categories: physiologically stable with low injury severity (n=132); physiologically stable with moderate to severe injury (n=122); and physiologically unstable with severe injury (n=56). Differences were assessed with Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Patients who were physiologically unstable were the least likely to receive a standardised pain assessment and the least likely to receive an opioid in the ED. Patients who were physiologically stable at entry to the ED but sustained a severe injury were the most likely to receive an opioid. Time to first pain assessment and time to first opioid did not differ by patient acuity. CONCLUSIONS: Results confirm that patient acuity greatly affects the ability to effectively and appropriately manage pain in the initial hours after injury. This study contributes to the literature by noting areas for improvement but also in explaining why delaying pain treatment may be appropriate in certain patient populations.