CHA2DS2-VASc and has-BLED scores do not accurately stratify risk for stroke or bleed in fall victims with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Falls are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the elderly. Non-valvular Atrial fibrillation (AF) is present in up to 9% of this group and often requires oral anticoagulation (OAC). The CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores are validated tools assessing risk of ischemic stroke from AF and major bleeding (MB) from OAC. It is unclear if these predictions remain accurate in post-fall patients. This study seeks to determine the stroke and major bleeding rate in atrial fibrillation patients after a ground level fall and identify if validated risk scoring systems accurately stratify risk in this cohort. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients with AF presented to the emergency department after a fall. CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were calculated. Follow up information was reviewed to 1 year. Patients were grouped according to discharge thromboprophylaxis plan (DTP): no treatment, Anti-platelet (AP), OAC, and AP + OAC. Outcomes were ischemic stroke, MB, or death at 1 year. Ischemic stroke and MB rates were calculated. Kruskal-Wallis, Χ2, Fisher's exact, and multivariable logistic regression were used to evaluate for clinical associations. RESULTS: 192 patients were included. MB rate was 14.5 bleeds/100 person-years, and ischemic stroke rate was 10.9/100 person-years. There were no observed differences between DTPs. Overall, one-year mortality was 22.1%. On unadjusted analysis, CHA2DS2-VASc did associate with ischemic stroke (p = 0.03); HAS-BLED did not associate with MB (p = 0.17). After logistic regression accounting for known risk factors, neither system associated with ischemic stroke or MB. CONCLUSIONS: Fall patients are at higher risk for both ischemic stroke and MB compared to previously published reports. Current risk assessment tools should be used with caution. Further study of risk factors is warranted to guide medication decisions in these patients.

Perceived loss of social support after non-neurologic injury negatively impacts recovery.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic injury is not only physically devastating, but also psychologically isolating, potentially leading to poor quality of life, depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Perceived social support (PSS) is associated with better outcomes in some populations. What is not known is if changes in PSS influence long-term outcomes following nonneurologic injury. We hypothesized that a single drop in PSS during recovery would be associated with worse quality of life. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a prospectively collected database that included patients 18 years or older admitted to a Level I trauma center with Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 10 or higher, and no traumatic brain or spinal cord injury. Demographic and injury data were collected at the initial hospital admission. Screening for depression, PTSD, and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 Mental Composite Score (MCS) were obtained at the initial hospitalization, 1, 2, 4, and 12 months postinjury. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) was obtained at similar time points. Patients with high MSPSS (>5) at baseline were included and grouped by those that ever reported a score ≤5 (DROP), and those that remained high (STABLE). Outcomes were determined at 4 and 12 months. RESULTS: Four hundred eleven patients were included with 96 meeting DROP criteria at 4 months, and 97 at 1 years. There were no differences in sex, race, or injury mechanism. The DROP patients were more likely to be single (p = 0.012 at 4 months, p = 0.0006 at 1 year) and unemployed (p = 0.016 at 4 months, and p = 0.026 at 1 year) compared with STABLE patients. At 4 months and 1 year, DROP patients were more likely to have PTSD, depression, and a lower MCS (p = 0.0006, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Patients who have a drop in PSS during the first year of recovery have significantly higher odds of poor psychological outcomes. Identifying these socially frail patients provides an opportunity for intervention to positively influence an otherwise poor quality of life. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Prognostic and Epidemiological, Level III.

Increased trauma activation is not equally beneficial for all elderly trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Physiologic changes in the elderly lead to higher morbidity and mortality after injury. Increasing level of trauma activation has been proposed to improve geriatric outcomes, but the increased cost to the patient and stress to the hospital system are significant downsides. The purpose of this study was to identify the age at which an increase in activation status is beneficial. METHODS: A retrospective review of trauma patients 70 years or older from October 1, 2011, to October 1, 2016, was performed. On October 1, 2013, a policy change increased the activation criteria to the highest level for patients 70 years or older with a significant mechanism of injury. Patients who presented prior to (PRE) were compared with those after the change (POST). Data collected included age, Injury Severity Score (ISS), length of stay (LOS), complications, and mortality. Primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcome was LOS. Multivariable regressions controlled for age, ISS, injury mechanism, and number of complications. RESULTS: A total of 4,341 patients met the inclusion criteria, 1,919 in PRE and 2,422 in POST. Mean age was 80.4 and 81 years in PRE and POST groups, respectively (p = 0.0155). Mean ISS values were 11.6 and 12.4 (p < 0.0001) for the PRE and POST groups. POST had more Level 1 activations (696 vs. 220, p < 0.0001). After controlling for age, ISS, mechanism of injury, and number of complications, mortality was significantly reduced in the POST group 77 years or older (odds ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-0.87) (Fig. 1). Hospital LOS was significantly reduced in the POST group age 78 years or older (regression coefficient, -0.55; 95% confidence interval, -1.09 to -0.01) (Fig. 2). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests geriatric trauma patients 77 years or older benefit from the highest level of trauma activation with shorter LOS and lower mortality. A focused approach to increasing activation level for elderly patients may decrease patient cost. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management, level IV.

The Alvarado score should be used to reduce emergency department length of stay and radiation exposure in select patients with abdominal pain.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal pain is the common reason patients seek treatment in emergency departments (ED), and computed tomography (CT) is frequently used for diagnosis; however, length of stay (LOS) in the ED and risks of radiation remain a concern. The hypothesis of this study was the Alvarado score (AS) could be used to reduce CT scans and decrease ED LOS for patients with suspected acute appendicitis (AA). METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent CT to rule out AA from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2015, was performed. Patient demographics, medical history, ED documentation, operative interventions, complications, and LOS were all collected. Alvarado score was calculated from the medical record. Time to CT completion was calculated from times the patient was seen by ED staff, CT order, and CT report. RESULTS: Four hundred ninety-two patients (68.1% female; median age, 33 years) met the inclusion criteria. Most CT scans (70%) did not have findings consistent with AA. Median AS for AA on CT scan was 7, compared with 3 for negative CT (p < 0.001). One hundred percent of female patients with AS of 10 and males with AS of 9 or greater had AA confirmed by surgical pathology. Conversely, 5% or less of female patients with AS of 2 or less and 0% of male patients with AS of 1 or less were diagnosed with AA. One hundred six (21.5%) patients had an AS within these ranges and collectively spent 10,239 minutes in the ED from the time of the CT order until the radiologist's report. CONCLUSION: Males with an AS of 9 or greater and females with AS of 10 should be considered for treatment of AA without imaging. Males with AS of 1 or less and females with AS of 2 or less can be safely discharged with follow-up. Using AS, a significant proportion of patients can avoid the radiation risk, the increased cost, and increased ED LOS associated with CT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic IV, therapeutic IV.