Does the implementation of a trauma system affect injury-related morbidity and economic outcomes? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Trauma accounts for a huge burden of disease worldwide. Trauma systems have been implemented in multiple countries across the globe, aiming to link and optimise multiple aspects of the trauma care pathway, and while they have been shown to reduce overall mortality, much less is known about their cost-effectiveness and impact on morbidity. METHODS: We performed a systematic review to explore the impact the implementation of a trauma system has on morbidity, quality of life and economic outcomes, in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. All comparator study types published since 2000 were included, both retrospective and prospective in nature, and no limits were placed on language. Data were reported as a narrative review. RESULTS: Seven articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria, all of which reported a pre-trauma and post-trauma system implementation comparison in high-income settings. The overall study quality was poor, with all studies demonstrating a severe risk of bias. Five studies reported across multiple types of trauma patients, the majority describing a positive impact across a variety of morbidity and health economic outcomes following trauma system implementation. Two studies focused specifically on traumatic brain injury and did not demonstrate any impact on morbidity outcomes. DISCUSSION: There is currently limited and poor quality evidence that assesses the impact that trauma systems have on morbidity, quality of life and economic outcomes. While trauma systems have a fundamental role to play in high-quality trauma care, morbidity and disability data can have large economic and cultural consequences, even if mortality rates have improved. The sociocultural and political context of the surrounding healthcare infrastructure must be better understood before implementing any trauma system, particularly in resource-poor and fragile settings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022348529 LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

The Impact of Trauma System Implementation on Patient Quality of Life and Economic Burden: A Systematic Review Study Protocol.

Background: Trauma accounts for 10% of global mortality, with increasing rates disproportionally affecting low- and middle-income countries. In an attempt to improve clinical outcomes after injury, trauma systems have been implemented in multiple countries over recent years. However, whilst many studies have subsequently demonstrated improvements in overall mortality outcomes, less is known about the impact trauma systems have on morbidity, quality of life, and economic burden. This systematic review seeks to assess the existing evidence base for trauma systems with these outcome measures. Methods: This review will include any study that assesses the impact implementation of a trauma system has on patient morbidity, quality of life, or economic burden. Any comparator study, including cohort, case-control, and randomised controlled studies, will be included, both retrospective or prospective in nature. Studies conducted from any region in the world and involving any age of patient will be included. We will collect data on any morbidity outcomes, health-related quality of life measures, or health economic assessments reported. We predict a high heterogeneity in these outcomes used and will therefore keep inclusion criteria broad. Discussion: Previous reviews have shown the significant improvements that can be achieved in mortality outcomes with the implementation of an organised trauma system, however the wider impact they can have on morbidity outcomes, quality of life measures, and the economic burden of trauma, is less well described. This systematic review will present all available data on these outcomes, helping to better characterise both the societal and economic impact of trauma system implementation. Highlights: Trauma systems are known to improve mortality rates, however less in known on the impact they have on morbidity outcomes, quality of life, and economic burdenWe aim to perform a systematic review to identify any comparator study that assesses the impact implementation of a trauma system on these outcomesUnderstanding the impact trauma systems can have on wider parameters, such as economic and quality of life outcomes, is crucial to allow governments globally to appropriately allocate often limited healthcare resources.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022348529.

CASE REPORT An Unusual Case of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome Following Resection of Extensive Posttraumatic Mesenteric Ossification.

INTRODUCTION: Heterotopic mesenteric ossification is an extremely rare condition, which often follows trauma and is frequently symptomatic. To date, there are no reports in the literature of abdominal compartment syndrome occurring after surgical resection of mesenteric calcification. The present report documents an unusual case of compartment syndrome complicating resection of extensive mesenteric calcification despite abdominal closure with the components-separation technique. METHOD: A 48-year-old man undergoing components-separation technique for posttraumatic laparostomy hernia repair (ileostomy reversal and sigmoid stricture correction) was found to have extensive heterotopic mesenteric calcification, which needed resection. RESULTS: Resection of the mesenteric calcification was complicated by intraoperative hemorrhage and unplanned small bowel resection. Later the patient developed secondary hemorrhage leading to an abdominal compartment syndrome, which was successfully treated by decompression, hemostasis, and Permacol-assisted laparotomy wound closure. The patient remains symptom-free more than 2 years after surgery. DISCUSSION: The case herein reported gives an account of the rare occurrence of abdominal compartment syndrome following resection of posttraumatic ectopic mesenteric ossifications. It is highly unusual in that it occurred because of "secondary hemorrhage" and despite abdominal closure with the components-separation technique, which had been undertaken precisely to prevent compartment syndrome with direct closure. It therefore highlights the need for continued clinical vigilance in complex posttraumatic cases.