Evaluating the Effects of Opioid Prescribing Policies on Patient Outcomes in a Safety-net Primary Care Clinic.

BACKGROUND: After decades of liberal opioid prescribing, multiple efforts have been made to reduce reliance upon opioids in clinical care. Little is known about the effects of opioid prescribing policies on outcomes beyond opioid prescribing. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the combined effects of multiple opioid prescribing policies implemented in a safety-net primary care clinic in San Francisco, CA, in 2013-2014. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study and conditional difference-in-differences analysis of nonrandomized clinic-level policies. PATIENTS: 273 patients prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain in 2013 at either the treated (n=151) or control clinic (n=122) recruited and interviewed in 2017-2018. INTERVENTIONS: Policies establishing standard protocols for dispensing opioid refills and conducting urine toxicology testing, and a new committee facilitating opioid treatment decisions for complex patient cases. MAIN MEASURES: Opioid prescription (active prescription, mean dose in morphine milligram equivalents [MME]) from electronic medical charts, and heroin and opioid analgesics not prescribed to the patient (any use, use frequency) from a retrospective interview. KEY RESULTS: The interventions were associated with a reduction in mean prescribed opioid dose in the first three post-policy years (year 1 conditional difference-in-differences estimate: -52.0 MME [95% confidence interval: -109.9, -10.6]; year 2: -106.2 MME [-195.0, -34.6]; year 3: -98.6 MME [-198.7, -23.9]; year 4: -72.6 MME [-160.4, 3.6]). Estimates suggest a possible positive association between the interventions and non-prescribed opioid analgesic use (year 3: 5.2 absolute percentage points [-0.1, 11.2]) and use frequency (year 3: 0.21 ordinal frequency scale points [0.00, 0.47]) in the third post-policy year. CONCLUSIONS: Clinic-level opioid prescribing policies were associated with reduced dose, although the control clinic achieved similar reductions by the fourth post-policy year, and the policies may have been associated with increased non-prescribed opioid analgesic use. Clinicians should balance the urgency to reduce opioid prescribing with potential harms from rapid change.

How Well Do EMS Providers Predict Intracranial Hemorrhage in Head-Injured Older Adults?

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of emergency medical services (EMS) provider judgment for traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (tICH) in older patients following head trauma in the field. We also compared EMS provider judgment with other sets of field triage criteria. Methods: This was a prospective observational cohort study conducted with five EMS agencies and 11 hospitals in Northern California. Patients 55 years and older who experienced blunt head trauma were transported by EMS between August 1, 2015 and September 30, 2016, and received an initial cranial computed tomography (CT) imaging, were eligible. EMS providers were asked, "What is your suspicion for the patient having intracranial hemorrhage (bleeding in the brain)?" Responses were recorded as ordinal categories (<1%, 1-5%, >5-10%, >10-50%, or >50%) and the incidences of tICH were recorded for each category. The accuracy of EMS provider judgment was compared to other sets of triage criteria, including current field triage criteria, current field triage criteria plus multivariate logistical regression risk factors, and actual transport. Results: Among the 673 patients enrolled, 319 (47.0%) were male and the median age was 75 years (interquartile range 64-85). Seventy-six (11.3%) patients had tICH on initial cranial CT imaging. The increase in EMS provider judgment correlated with an increase in the incidence of tICH. EMS provider judgment had a sensitivity of 77.6% (95% CI 67.1-85.5%) and a specificity of 41.5% (37.7-45.5%) when using a threshold of 1% or higher suspicion for tICH. Current field triage criteria (Steps 1-3) was poorly sensitive (26.3%, 95% CI 17.7-37.2%) in identifying tICH and current field trial criteria plus multivariate logistical regression risk factors was sensitive (97.4%, 95% CI 90.9-99.3%) but poorly specific (12.9%, 95% CI 10.4-15.8%). Actual transport was comparable to EMS provider judgment (sensitivity 71.1%, 95% CI 60.0-80.0%; specificity 35.3%, 95% CI 31.6-38.3%). Conclusions: As EMS provider judgment for tICH increased, the incidence for tICH also increased. EMS provider judgment, using a threshold of 1% or higher suspicion for tICH, was more accurate than current field triage criteria, with and without additional risk factors included.

Opioid Prescribing Rates in Nonmetropolitan and Metropolitan Counties Among Primary Care Providers Using an Electronic Health Record System - United States, 2014-2017.

Drug overdose is the leading cause of unintentional injury-associated death in the United States. Among 70,237 fatal drug overdoses in 2017, prescription opioids were involved in 17,029 (24.2%) (1). Higher rates of opioid-related deaths have been recorded in nonmetropolitan (rural) areas (2). In 2017, 14 rural counties were among the 15 counties with the highest opioid prescribing rates.* Higher opioid prescribing rates put patients at risk for addiction and overdose (3). Using deidentified data from the Athenahealth electronic health record (EHR) system, opioid prescribing rates among 31,422 primary care providers† in the United States were analyzed to evaluate trends from January 2014 to March 2017. This analysis assessed how prescribing practices varied among six urban-rural classification categories of counties, before and after the March 2016 release of CDC's Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain (Guideline) (4). Patients in noncore (the most rural) counties had an 87% higher chance of receiving an opioid prescription compared with persons in large central metropolitan counties during the study period. Across all six county groups, the odds of receiving an opioid prescription decreased significantly after March 2016. This decrease followed a flat trend during the preceding period in micropolitan and large central metropolitan county groups; in contrast, the decrease continued previous downward trends in the other four county groups. Data from EHRs can effectively supplement traditional surveillance methods for monitoring trends in opioid prescribing and other areas of public health importance, with minimal lag time under ideal conditions. As less densely populated areas appear to indicate both substantial progress in decreasing opioid prescribing and ongoing need for reduction, community health care practices and intervention programs must continue to be tailored to community characteristics.

Evaluation of a Safer Opioid Prescribing Protocol (SOPP) for Patients Being Discharged From a Trauma Service.

The aims of this study were to evaluate the effects on opioid medication prescribing, patient opioid safety education, and prescribing of naloxone following implementation of a Safer Opioid Prescribing Protocol (SOPP) as part of the electronic health record (EHR) system at a Level I trauma center. This was a prospective observational study of the EHR of trauma patients pre- (n = 191) and post-(n = 316) SOPP implementation between 2014 and 2016. At a comparison Level I trauma site not implementing SOPP, EHRs for the same time period were assessed for any historical trends in opioid and naloxone prescribing. After SOPP implementation, the implementation site increased the use of nonnarcotic pain medication, decreased dispensing high opioid dose (≥100 MME [milligram morphine equivalent]), significantly increased the delivery of opioid safety education to patients, and initiated prescribing naloxone. These changes were not found in the comparison site. Opioid prescribing for acute pain can be effectively reduced in a busy trauma setting with a guideline intervention incorporated into an EHR. Guidelines can increase the use of nonnarcotic medications for the treatment of acute pain and increase naloxone coprescription for patients with a higher risk of overdose.

Naloxone Administration Frequency During Emergency Medical Service Events - United States, 2012-2016.

As the opioid epidemic in the United States has continued since the early 2000s (1,2), most descriptions have focused on misuse and deaths. Increased cooperation with state and local partners has enabled more rapid and comprehensive surveillance of nonfatal opioid overdoses (3).* Naloxone administrations obtained from emergency medical services (EMS) patient care records have served as a useful proxy for overdose surveillance in individual communities and might be a previously unused data source to describe the opioid epidemic, including fatal and nonfatal events, on a national level (4-6). Using data from the National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS),† the trend in rate of EMS naloxone administration events from 2012 to 2016 was compared with opioid overdose mortality rates from National Vital Statistics System multiple cause-of-death mortality files. During 2012-2016, the rate of EMS naloxone administration events increased 75.1%, from 573.6 to 1004.4 administrations per 100,000 EMS events, mirroring the 79.7% increase in opioid overdose mortality from 7.4 deaths per 100,000 persons to 13.3. A bimodal age distribution of patients receiving naloxone from EMS parallels a similar age distribution of deaths, with persons aged 25-34 years and 45-54 years most affected. However, an accurate estimate of the complete injury burden of the opioid epidemic requires assessing nonfatal overdoses in addition to deaths. Evaluating and monitoring nonfatal overdose events via the novel approach of using EMS data might assist in the development of timely interventions to address the evolving opioid crisis.

Impact of Florida's prescription drug monitoring program and pill mill law on high-risk patients: A comparative interrupted time series analysis.

PURPOSE: We quantified the effects of Florida's prescription drug monitoring program and pill mill law on high-risk patients. METHODS: We used QuintilesIMS LRx Lifelink data to identify patients receiving prescription opioids in Florida (intervention state, N: 1.13 million) and Georgia (control state, N: 0.54 million). The preintervention, intervention, and postintervention periods were July 2010 to June 2011, July 2011 to September 2011, and October 2011 to September 2012. We identified 3 types of high-risk patients: (1) concomitant users: patients with concomitant use of benzodiazepines and opioids; (2) chronic users: long-term, high-dose, opioid users; and (3) opioid shoppers: patients receiving opioids from multiple sources. We compared changes in opioid prescriptions between Florida and Georgia before and after policy implementation among high-risk/low-risk patients. Our monthly measures included (1) average morphine milligram equivalent per transaction, (2) total opioid volume across all prescriptions, (3) average days supplied per transaction, and (4) total number of opioid prescriptions dispensed. RESULTS: Among opioid-receiving individuals in Florida, 6.62% were concomitant users, 1.96% were chronic users, and 0.46% were opioid shoppers. Following policy implementation, Florida's high-risk patients experienced relative reductions in morphine milligram equivalent (opioid shoppers: -1.08 mg/month, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.62 to -0.54), total opioid volume (chronic users: -4.58 kg/month, CI -5.41 to -3.76), and number of dispensed opioid prescriptions (concomitant users: -640 prescriptions/month, CI -950 to -340). Low-risk patients generally did not experience statistically significantly relative reductions. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with Georgia, Florida's prescription drug monitoring program and pill mill law were associated with large relative reductions in prescription opioid utilization among high-risk patients.

Methadone Prescribing and Overdose and the Association with Medicaid Preferred Drug List Policies - United States, 2007-2014.

Drug overdose is a leading cause of injury death in the United States; 47,055 fatal drug overdoses were reported in 2014, a 6.5% increase from the previous year (1), driven by opioid use disorder (2,3). Methadone is an opioid prescribed for pain management and is also provided through opioid treatment programs to treat opioid use disorders. Because methadone might remain in a person's system long after the pain-relieving benefits have been exhausted, it can cause slow or shallow breathing and dangerous changes in heartbeat that might not be perceived by the patient (4,5). In December 2006, the Food and Drug Administration issued a Public Health Advisory that alerted health care professionals to reports of death and life-threatening adverse events, such as respiratory depression and cardiac arrhythmias, in patients receiving methadone (4); in January 2008, a voluntary manufacturer restriction limited distribution of the 40 mg formulation of methadone.* CDC analyzed state mortality and health care data and preferred drug list (PDL) policies to 1) compare the percentage of deaths involving methadone with the rate of prescribing methadone for pain, 2) characterize variation in methadone prescribing among payers and states, and 3) assess whether an association existed between state Medicaid reimbursement PDL policies and methadone overdose rates. The analyses found that, from 2007 to 2014, large declines in methadone-related overdose deaths occurred. Prescriptions for methadone accounted for 0.85% of all opioid prescriptions for pain in the commercially insured population and 1.1% in the Medicaid population. In addition, an association was observed between Medicaid PDLs requiring prior authorization for methadone and lower rates of methadone overdose among Medicaid enrollees. PDL policies requiring prior authorization might help to reduce the number of methadone overdoses.

Out-of-Hospital Triage of Older Adults With Head Injury: A Retrospective Study of the Effect of Adding "Anticoagulation or Antiplatelet Medication Use" as a Criterion.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Field triage guidelines recommend that emergency medical services (EMS) providers consider transport of head-injured older adults with anticoagulation use to trauma centers. However, the triage patterns and the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage or neurosurgery in these patients are unknown. Our objective is to describe the characteristics and outcomes of older adults with head trauma who are transported by EMS, particularly for patients who do not meet physiologic, anatomic, or mechanism-of-injury (steps 1 to 3) field triage criteria but are receiving anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications. METHODS: This was a retrospective study at 5 EMS agencies and 11 hospitals (4 trauma centers, 7 nontrauma centers). Patients aged 55 years or older with head trauma who were transported by EMS were included. The primary outcome was the presence of intracranial hemorrhage. The secondary outcome was a composite measure of inhospital death or neurosurgery. RESULTS: Of the 2,110 patients included, 131 (6%) had intracranial hemorrhage and 41 (2%) had inhospital death or neurosurgery. There were 162 patients (8%) with steps 1 to 3 criteria. Of the remaining 1,948 patients without steps 1 to 3 criteria, 566 (29%) had anticoagulant or antiplatelet use. Of these patients, 52 (9%) had traumatic intracranial hemorrhage and 15 (3%) died or had neurosurgery. The sensitivity (adjusted for clustering by EMS agency) of steps 1 to 3 criteria was 19.8% (26/131; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.5% to 51.2%) for identifying traumatic intracranial hemorrhage and 34.1% (14/41; 95% CI 9.9% to 70.1%) for death or neurosurgery. The additional criterion of anticoagulant or antiplatelet use improved the sensitivity for intracranial hemorrhage (78/131; 59.5%; 95% CI 42.9% to 74.2%) and death or neurosurgery (29/41; 70.7%; 95% CI 61.0% to 78.9%). CONCLUSION: Relatively few patients met steps 1 to 3 triage criteria. For individuals who did not have steps 1 to 3 criteria, nearly 30% had anticoagulant or antiplatelet use. A relatively high proportion of these patients had intracranial hemorrhage, but a much smaller proportion died or had neurosurgery during hospitalization. Use of steps 1 to 3 triage criteria alone is not sufficient in identifying intracranial hemorrhage and death or neurosurgery in this patient population. The additional criterion of anticoagulant or antiplatelet use improves the sensitivity of the instrument, with only a modest decrease in specificity.

Multiple Naloxone Administrations Among Emergency Medical Service Providers is Increasing.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdoses are at epidemic levels in the United States. Emergency Medical Service (EMS) providers may administer naloxone to restore patient breathing and prevent respiratory arrest. There was a need for contemporary data to examine the number of naloxone administrations in an EMS encounter. METHODS: Using data from the National Emergency Medical Services Information System, we examined data from 2012-5 to determine trends in patients receiving multiple naloxone administrations (MNAs). Logistic regression including demographic, clinical, and operational information was used to examine factors associated with MNA. RESULTS: Among all events where naloxone was administered only 16.7% of the 911 calls specifically identified the medical emergency as a drug ingestion or poisoning event. The percentage of patients receiving MNA increased from 14.5% in 2012 to 18.2% in 2015, which represents a 26% increase in MNA in 4 years. Patients aged 20-29 had the highest percentage of MNA (21.1%). Patients in the Northeast and the Midwest had the highest relative MNA (Chi Squared = 539.5, p < 0.01 and Chi Squared = 351.2, p < 0.01, respectively). The logistic regression model showed that the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for MNA were greatest among people who live in the Northeast (aOR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.13-1.22) and for men (aOR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.10-1.16), but lower for suburban and rural areas (aOR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.72-0.80 and aOR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.80-0.89) and lowest for wilderness areas (aOR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.68-0.84). Higher adjusted odds of MNA occurred when an advanced life support (ALS 2) level of service was provided compared to basic life support (BLS) ambulances (aOR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.45-3.16) and when the dispatch complaint indicated there was a drug poisoning event (aOR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.09-1.16). Reported layperson naloxone administration prior to EMS arrival was rare (1%). CONCLUSION: This study shows that frequency of MNA is growing over time and is regionally dependent. MNA may be a barometer of the potency of the opioid involved in the overdose. The increase in MNA provides support for a dosage review. Better identification of opioid related events in the dispatch system could lead to a better match of services with patient needs.

Potentially Preventable Deaths Among the Five Leading Causes of Death - United States, 2010 and 2014.

Death rates by specific causes vary across the 50 states and the District of Columbia.* Information on differences in rates for the leading causes of death among states might help state health officials determine prevention goals, priorities, and strategies. CDC analyzed National Vital Statistics System data to provide national and state-specific estimates of potentially preventable deaths among the five leading causes of death in 2014 and compared these estimates with estimates previously published for 2010. Compared with 2010, the estimated number of potentially preventable deaths changed (supplemental material at https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/42472); cancer deaths decreased 25% (from 84,443 to 63,209), stroke deaths decreased 11% (from 16,973 to 15,175), heart disease deaths decreased 4% (from 91,757 to 87,950), chronic lower respiratory disease (CLRD) (e.g., asthma, bronchitis, and emphysema) deaths increased 1% (from 28,831 to 29,232), and deaths from unintentional injuries increased 23% (from 36,836 to 45,331). A better understanding of progress made in reducing potentially preventable deaths in the United States might inform state and regional efforts targeting the prevention of premature deaths from the five leading causes in the United States.

Bystander Intervention Prior to The Arrival of Emergency Medical Services: Comparing Assistance across Types of Medical Emergencies.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the situational circumstances associated with bystander interventions to render aid during a medical emergency. METHODS: This study examined 16.2 million Emergency Medical Service (EMS) events contained within the National Emergency Medical Services Information System. The records of patients following a 9-1-1 call for emergency medical assistance were analyzed using logistic regression to determine what factors influenced bystander interventions. The dependent variable of the model was whether or not a bystander intervened. RESULTS: EMS providers recorded bystander assistance 11% of the time. The logistic regression model correctly predicted bystander intervention occurrence 71.4% of the time. Bystanders were more likely to intervene when the patient was male (aOR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.12-1.3) and if the patient was older (progressive aOR = 1.10, 1.46 age group 20-29 through age group 60-99). Bystanders were less likely to intervene in rural areas compared to urban areas (aOR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.58-0.59). The highest likelihood of bystander intervention occurred in a residential institution (aOR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.85-1.86) and the lowest occurred on a street or a highway (aOR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.95-0.96). Using death as a reference group, bystanders were most likely to intervene when the patient had cardiac distress/chest pain (aOR = 11.38, 95% CI = 10.93-11.86), followed by allergic reaction (aOR = 7.63, 95% CI = 7.30-7.99), smoke inhalation (aOR = 6.65, 95% CI = 5.98-7.39), and respiration arrest/distress (aOR = 6.43, 95% CI = 6.17-6.70). A traumatic injury was the most commonly recorded known event, and it was also associated with a relatively high level of bystander intervention (aOR = 5.81, 95% CI = 5.58-6.05). The type of injury/illness that prompted the lowest likelihood of bystander assistance was Sexual Assault/Rape (aOR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.32-1.84) followed by behavioral/psychiatric disorder (aOR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.57-1.71). CONCLUSION: Bystander intervention varies greatly on situational factors and the type of medical emergency. A higher risk of patient death is likely to prompt bystander action. These novel study results can lead to more effective first aid training programs. KEY WORDS: bystander; EMS; rural; cardiac distress; trauma.

Hospitalized Traumatic Brain Injury: Low Trauma Center Utilization and High Interfacility Transfers among Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: Guidelines suggest that Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) related hospitalizations are best treated at Level I or II trauma centers because of continuous neurosurgical care in these settings. This population-based study examines TBI hospitalization treatment paths by age groups. METHODS: Trauma center utilization and transfers by age groups were captured by examining the total number of TBI hospitalizations from National Inpatient Sample (NIS) and the number of TBI hospitalizations and transfers in the Trauma Data Bank National Sample Population (NTDB-NSP). TBI cases were defined using diagnostic codes. RESULTS: Of the 351,555 TBI related hospitalizations in 2012, 47.9% (n = 168,317) were directly treated in a Level I or II trauma center, and an additional 20.3% (n = 71,286) were transferred to a Level I or II trauma center. The portion of the population treated at a trauma center (68.2%) was significantly lower than the portion of the U.S. population who has access to a major trauma center (90%). Further, nearly half of all transfers to a Level I or II trauma center were adults aged 55 and older (p < 0.001) and that 20.2% of pediatric patients arrive by non-ambulatory means. CONCLUSION: Utilization of trauma center resources for hospitalized TBIs may be low considering the established lower mortality rate associated with treatment at Level I or II trauma centers. The higher transfer rate for older adults may suggest rapid decline amid an unrecognized initial need for a trauma center care. A better understanding of hospital destination decision making is needed for patients with TBI.

Disparity in naloxone administration by emergency medical service providers and the burden of drug overdose in US rural communities.

OBJECTIVES: We determined the factors that affect naloxone (Narcan) administration in drug overdoses, including the certification level of emergency medical technicians (EMTs). METHODS: In 2012, 42 states contributed all or a portion of their ambulatory data to the National Emergency Medical Services Information System. We used a logistic regression model to measure the association between naloxone administration and emergency medical services certification level, age, gender, geographic location, and patient primary symptom. RESULTS: The odds of naloxone administration were much higher among EMT-intermediates than among EMT-basics (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 5.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.5, 6.5). Naloxone use was higher in suburban areas than in urban areas (AOR = 1.41; 95% CI = 1.3, 1.5), followed by rural areas (AOR = 1.23; 95% CI = 1.1, 1.3). Although the odds of naloxone administration were 23% higher in rural areas than in urban areas, the opioid drug overdose rate is 45% higher in rural communities. CONCLUSIONS: Naloxone is less often administered by EMT-basics, who are more common in rural areas. In most states, the scope-of-practice model prohibits naloxone administration by basic EMTs. Reducing this barrier could help prevent drug overdose death.

Guidelines for field triage of injured patients: recommendations of the National Expert Panel on Field Triage, 2011.

In the United States, injury is the leading cause of death for persons aged 1-44 years. In 2008, approximately 30 million injuries were serious enough to require the injured person to visit a hospital emergency department (ED); 5.4 million (18%) of these injured patients were transported by Emergency Medical Services (EMS). On arrival at the scene of an injury, the EMS provider must determine the severity of injury, initiate management of the patient's injuries, and decide the most appropriate destination hospital for the individual patient. These destination decisions are made through a process known as "field triage," which involves an assessment not only of the physiology and anatomy of injury but also of the mechanism of the injury and special patient and system considerations. Since 1986, the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS-COT) has provided guidance for the field triage process through its "Field Triage Decision Scheme." This guidance was updated with each version of the decision scheme (published in 1986, 1990, 1993, and 1999). In 2005, CDC, with financial support from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, collaborated with ACS-COT to convene the initial meetings of the National Expert Panel on Field Triage (the Panel) to revise the decision scheme; the revised version was published in 2006 by ACS-COT (American College of Surgeons. Resources for the optimal care of the injured patient: 2006. Chicago, IL: American College of Surgeons; 2006). In 2009, CDC published a detailed description of the scientific rationale for revising the field triage criteria (CDC. Guidelines for field triage of injured patients: recommendations of the National Expert Panel on Field Triage. MMWR 2009;58[No. RR-1]). In 2011, CDC reconvened the Panel to review the 2006 Guidelines in the context of recently published literature, assess the experiences of states and local communities working to implement the Guidelines, and recommend any needed changes or modifications to the Guidelines. This report describes the dissemination and impact of the 2006 Guidelines; outlines the methodology used by the Panel for its 2011 review; explains the revisions and modifications to the physiologic, anatomic, mechanism-of-injury, and special considerations criteria; updates the schematic of the 2006 Guidelines; and provides the rationale used by the Panel for these changes. This report is intended to help prehospital-care providers in their daily duties recognize individual injured patients who are most likely to benefit from specialized trauma center resources and is not intended as a mass casualty or disaster triage tool. The Panel anticipates a review of these Guidelines approximately every 5 years.

The Role of the US Trauma Centers in Older Adult Fall Prevention: A National Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 27.5% of adults 65 and older fall each year, over 3 million are treated in an emergency department, and 32 000 die. The American College of Surgeons and its Committee on Trauma (ACSCOT) have urged trauma centers (TCs) to screen for fall risk, but information on the role of TC in this opportunity for prevention is largely unknown. METHODS: A 29-item survey was developed by an ACSCOT Injury Prevention and Control Committee, Older Adult Falls workgroup, and emailed to 1000 trauma directors of the National Trauma Data Bank using Qualtrics. US TCs were surveyed regarding fall prevention, screening, intervention, and hospital discharge practices. Data collected and analyzed included respondent's role, location, population density, state designation or American College of Surgeons (ACS) level, if teaching facility, and patient population. RESULTS: Of the 266 (27%) respondents, 71% of TCs include fall prevention as part of their mission, but only 16% of TCs use fall risk screening tools. There was no significant difference between geographic location or ACS level. The number of prevention resources (F = 31.58, P < .0001) followed by the presence of a formal screening tool (F = 21.47, P < .0001) best predicted the presence of a fall prevention program. CONCLUSION: Older adult falls remain a major injury risk and injury prevention opportunity. The majority of TCs surveyed include prevention of older adult falls as part of their mission, but few incorporate the components of a fall prevention program. Development of best practices and requiring TCs to screen and offer interventions may prevent falls.

A review of traumatic brain injury trauma center visits meeting physiologic criteria from The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Field Triage Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) represents a serious subset of injuries among persons in the United States, and prehospital care of these injuries can mitigate both the morbidity and the mortality in patients who suffer from these injuries. Guidelines for triage of injured patients have been set forth by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS-COT) in cooperation with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). These guidelines include physiologic criteria, such as the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, systolic blood pressure, and respiratory rate, which should be used in determining triage of an injured patient. OBJECTIVES: This study examined the numbers of visits at level I and II trauma centers by patients with a diagnosed TBI to determine the prevalence of those meeting physiologic criteria from the ACS-COT/CDC guidelines and to determine the extent of mortality among this patient population. METHODS: The data for this study were taken from the 2007 National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) National Sample Program (NSP). This data set is a nationally representative sample of visits to level I and II trauma centers across the United States and is funded by the American College of Surgeons. Estimates of demographic characteristics, physiologic measures, and death were made for this study population using both chi-square analyses and adjusted logistic regression modeling. RESULTS: The analyses demonstrated that although many people who sustain a TBI and were taken to a level I or II trauma center did not meet the physiologic criteria, those who did meet the physiologic criteria had significantly higher odds of death than those who did not meet the criteria. After controlling for age, gender, race, Injury Severity Score (ISS), and length of stay in the hospital, persons who had a GCS score ≤13 were 17 times more likely to die than TBI patients who had a higher GCS score (odds ratio [OR] 17.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.7-28.3). Other physiologic criteria also demonstrated significant odds of death. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the validity of the ACS-COT/CDC physiologic criteria in this population and stress the importance of prehospital triage of patients with TBI in the hopes of reducing both the morbidity and the mortality resulting from this injury.

Large cost savings realized from the 2006 Field Triage Guideline: reduction in overtriage in U.S. trauma centers.

BACKGROUND: Ambulance transport of injured patients to the most appropriate medical care facility is an important decision. Trauma centers are designed and staffed to treat severely injured patients and are increasingly burdened by cases involving less-serious injury. Yet, a cost evaluation of the Field Triage national guideline has never been performed. OBJECTIVES: To examine the potential cost savings associated with overtriage for the 1999 and 2006 versions of the Field Triage Guideline. METHODS: Data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and the National Trauma Databank (NTDB) produced estimates of injury-related ambulatory transports and exposure to the Field Triage guideline. Case costs were approximated using a cost distribution curve of all cases found in the NTDB. A two-way sensitivity analysis was also used to determine the impact of data uncertainty on medical costs and the reduction in trauma center visits (12%) after implementation of the 2006 Field Triage guideline compared with the 1999 Field Triage guideline. RESULTS: At a 40% overtriage rate, the average case cost was $16,434. The cost average of 44.2% reduction in case costs if patients were treated in a non-trauma center compared with a trauma center was found in the literature. Implementation of the 2006 Field Triage guideline produced a $7,264 cost savings per case, or an estimated annual national savings of $568,000,000. CONCLUSION: Application of the 2006 Field Triage guideline helps emergency medical services personnel manage overtriage in trauma centers, which could result in a significant national cost savings.

Reduced mortality in injured adults transported by helicopter emergency medical services.

BACKGROUND: Some studies have shown improved outcomes with helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) transport, while others have not. Safety concerns and cost have prompted reevaluation of the widespread use of HEMS. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the mode of transport of trauma patients affects mortality. METHODS: Data for 56,744 injured adults aged ≥ 18 years transported to 62 U.S. trauma centers by helicopter or ground ambulance were obtained from the National Sample Program of the 2007 National Trauma Data Bank. In-hospital mortality was calculated for different demographic and injury severity groups. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) were produced by utilizing a logistic regression model measuring the association of mortality and type of transport, controlling for age, gender, and injury severity (Injury Severity Score [ISS] and Revised Trauma Score [RTS]). RESULTS: The odds of death were 39% lower in those transported by HEMS compared with those transported by ground ambulance (AOR = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.54-0.69). Among those aged ≥ 55 years, the odds of death were not significantly different (AOR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.74-1.13). Among all transports, male patients had a higher odds of death (AOR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.10-1.38) than female patients. The odds of death increased with each year of age (AOR = 1.040, 95% CI = 1.037-1.043) and each unit of ISS (AOR = 1.080, 95% CI = 1.075-1.084), and decreased with each unit of RTS (AOR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.45-0.48). CONCLUSION: The use of HEMS for the transport of adult trauma patients was associated with reduced mortality for patients aged 18-54 years. In this study, HEMS did not improve mortality in adults aged ≥ 55 years. Identification of additional variables in the selection of those patients who will benefit from HEMS transport is expected to enhance this reduction in mortality.

Injuries after Hurricane Katrina among Gulf Coast Evacuees sheltered in Houston, Texas.

INTRODUCTION: After Hurricane Katrina and a decline in the living conditions at a major temporary shelter in New Orleans, Louisiana, residents were offered transport to a Mega-Shelter in Houston, Texas. Approximately 200,000 Gulf Coast residents were transported to Houston's Astrodome/Reliant Center Complex for appropriate triage and transfer to other shelter facilities. The Katrina Clinic was quickly organized to treat evacuees with acute injuries and illnesses as well as chronic medical conditions. Clinic physicians documented 1130 hurricane-related injuries during Katrina Clinic's operational interval, September 1-22, 2005. METHODS: This article documents the nature, extent, and location of injuries treated at that clinic. We compare the frequency of injury among Katrina evacuees who visited the clinic to that of injuries among clinic outpatient records recorded in a nationally representative database. Using the Barell Matrix system and codes from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, we classify Katrina injuries by body region and nature of injury; we also document the large number of hurricane-related immunizations distributed at the temporary outpatient clinic. RESULTS: The results show a 42% higher injury proportion among Katrina evacuees and that approximately half of all of the evacuees required immunizations. Lower leg extremity injuries were among the most frequent injuries. DISCUSSION: Future planning for hurricanes should take into account nonfatal injuries requiring medical treatment and other supportive care.

Using ICD-10-CM codes to detect illicit substance use: A comparison with retrospective self-report.

BACKGROUND: Understanding whether International Classification of Disease, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes can be used to accurately detect substance use can inform their use in future surveillance and research efforts. METHODS: Using 2015-2018 data from a retrospective cohort study of 602 safety-net patients prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain, we calculated the sensitivity and specificity of using ICD-10-CM codes to detect illicit substance use compared to retrospective self-report by substance (methamphetamine, cocaine, opioids [heroin or non-prescribed opioid analgesics]), self-reported use frequency, and type of healthcare encounter. RESULTS: Sensitivity of ICD-10-CM codes for detecting self-reported substance use was highest for methamphetamine (49.5 % [95 % confidence interval: 39.6-59.5 %]), followed by cocaine (44.4 % [35.8-53.2 %]) and opioids (36.3 % [28.8-44.2 %]); higher for participants who reported more frequent methamphetamine (intermittent use: 27.7 % [14.6-42.6 %]; ≥weekly use: 67.2 % [53.7-79.0 %]) and opioid use (intermittent use: 21.4 % [13.2-31.7 %]; ≥weekly use: 52.6 % [40.8-64.2 %]); highest for outpatient visits (methamphetamine: 43.8 % [34.1-53.8 %]; cocaine: 36.8 % [28.6-45.6 %]; opioids: 33.1 % [25.9-41.0 %]) and lowest for emergency department visits (methamphetamine: 8.6 % [4.0-15.6 %]; cocaine: 5.3 % [2.1-10.5 %]; opioids: 6.3 % [3.0-11.2 %]). Specificity was highest for methamphetamine (96.4 % [94.3-97.8 %]), followed by cocaine (94.0 % [91.5-96.0 %]) and opioids (85.0 % [81.3-88.2 %]). CONCLUSIONS: ICD-10-CM codes had high specificity and low sensitivity for detecting self-reported substance use but were substantially more sensitive in detecting frequent use. ICD-10-CM codes to detect substance use, particularly those from emergency department visits, should be used with caution, but may be useful as a lower-bound population measure of substance use or for capturing frequent use among certain patient populations.