Risk factors for loss to follow-up after traumatic injury: An updated view of a chronic problem.

BACKGROUND: Loss to follow-up after traumatic injury occurs at rates of up to 47%. However, the most recent data are over a decade old, and recent changes in traumatic injury patterns necessitate an updated assessment of risk factors for loss to follow-up after trauma. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of trauma admissions from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2021. Categorical variables were compared using χ2 analyses, and continuous variables were analyzed using Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for relevant factors identified on unadjusted analysis. RESULTS: Among 3,034 patients, overall loss to follow-up was 36.9%. Non-White patients, patients who underwent operations or non-surgical procedures, and patients discharged to rehabilitation facilities were more likely to have follow-up appointments within 30 days. Patients with substance use disorder and, among White patients, those with public insurance had higher loss to follow-up rates. Having a follow-up appointment scheduled with a primary care provider was the single most significant factor associated with attending a follow-up appointment. CONCLUSION: Social determinants of health, such as insurance status and substance use disorder, are associated with loss of follow-up after trauma. Primary care appointments are associated with the highest attendance rates, supporting that all patients should be offered primary care appointments after traumatic injury.

Scheduled Follow-Up and Association with Emergency Department Use and Readmission after Trauma.

BACKGROUND: After traumatic injury, 13% to 14% of patients use the emergency department (ED) and 11% are readmitted within 30 days. Decreasing ED visits and readmission represents a target for quality improvement. This cohort study evaluates risk factors for ED visits and readmission after trauma, focusing on outpatient follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective chart review of adult trauma admissions from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021. Our primary exposure was outpatient follow-up, primary outcome was ED use, and secondary outcome was readmission. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the association between primary exposure and outcomes, adjusting for factors identified on unadjusted analysis. RESULTS: In total, 2,266 patients met inclusion criteria, with an 11.3% ED visit rate and 4.1% readmission rate. Attending follow-up did not have a significant association with ED visit (odds ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.01, p = 0.05) or readmission rate (odds ratio 1.68, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.99, p = 0.08). Significant associations with ED use included non-White race, depression, anxiety, substance use disorder, discharge disposition, and being discharged with lines or drains. Significant associations with readmission included depression, anxiety, and discharge disposition. CONCLUSIONS: Emphasizing outpatient follow-up in trauma patients is not an effective target to decrease ED use or readmission. Future studies should focus on supporting patients with mental health comorbidities and investigating interventions to optimally engage with trauma patients after hospital discharge.

Timing of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis initiation and complications in polytrauma patients with high-risk bleeding orthopedic interventions: A nationwide analysis.

INTRODUCTION: There are no clear recommendations for the perioperative timing and initiation of venous thromboembolism pharmacologic prophylaxis (VTEp) among polytrauma patients undergoing high-risk bleeding orthopedic operative intervention, leading to variations in VTEp administration. Our study examined the association between the timing of VTEp and VTE complications in polytrauma patients undergoing high-risk operative orthopedic interventions nationwide. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of trauma patients 18 years or older who underwent high-risk bleeding operative orthopedic interventions for pelvic, hip, and femur fractures within 24 hours of admission at American College of Surgeons-verified trauma centers using the 2019-2020 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program databank. We excluded patients with a competing risk of nonorthopedic surgical bleeding. We assessed operative orthopedic polytrauma patients who received VTEp within 12 hours of orthopedic surgical intervention compared with VTEp received beyond 12 hours of intervention. The primary outcome assessed was overall VTE events. Secondary outcomes were orthopedic reinterventions within 72 hours after primary orthopedic surgery, deep venous thromboembolism, and pulmonary embolism rates. RESULTS: The study included 2,229 patients who underwent high-risk orthopedic operative intervention. The median time to VTEp initiation was 30 hours (interquartile range, 18-44 hours). After adjustment for baseline patient, injury, and hospital characteristics, VTEp initiated more than 12 hours from primary orthopedic surgery was associated with increased odds of VTE (adjusted odds ratio, 2.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-3.77). Earlier initiation of prophylaxis was not associated with an increased risk for surgical reintervention (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-1.34). CONCLUSION: Administering VTEp within 24 hours of admission and within 12 hours of major orthopedic surgery involving the femur, pelvis, or hip demonstrated an associated decreased risk of in-hospital VTE without an accompanying elevated risk of bleeding-related orthopedic reintervention. Clinicians should reconsider delays in initiating or withholding perioperative VTEp for stable polytrauma patients needing major orthopedic intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.