Effect of Obesity on Early, In-Hospital Amputation Risk Following Popliteal Artery Injury Using an Analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.

BACKGROUND: Popliteal artery injury is associated with a high risk of limb loss; identifying factors associated with increased morbidity and mortality is hampered by its rare occurrence and confounding factors. Anecdotal observations suggest delay in diagnosis of obese patients may be associated with amputation. We aimed to determine whether there is an increased risk of early amputation and if diagnosis is delayed in obese patients with popliteal artery injuries. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) data from 2013 to 2017. We extracted those sustaining popliteal artery injury, assigning obesity class based on body mass index. We included select demographic and clinical variables, using time to imaging as a surrogate for time to diagnosis. Statistical models were used to calculate the impact of obesity on amputation rates and time to diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified 4803 popliteal artery injuries in the data set; 3289 met inclusion criteria. We calculated an 8.5% overall amputation rate, which was not significantly different between obese (N = 1305; 39.7%) and nonobese (N = 1984; 60.3%) patients. Statistical analysis identified peripheral vascular disease, diabetes, and smoking as risk factors for amputation. Time to imaging was similar for obese and nonobese patients. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Analysis of NTDB data suggests that obesity is associated with neither increased early amputation rate nor longer time to imaging in patients with popliteal artery injury. However, our study suggests that underlying comorbidities of peripheral vascular disease and diabetes are associated with an increased risk for amputation in these patients.

Family Survey of Understanding and Communication of Patient Prognosis in the Intensive Care Unit: Identifying Training Opportunities.

OBJECTIVE: Family members making medical decisions for critically ill patients depend on surgeons' high-quality communication. We aimed to assess family experience of communication in the trauma intensive care unit (TICU), identify opportunities for improvement, and tailor resident communication training to address deficiencies. DESIGN: We designed surveys based on our Conceptual Model of Surgeon Communication and Family Understanding, using items from previously validated tools to assess (1) family well-being, experiences of care, access to information, and assessment of patient condition and prognosis; and (2) surgeon and nursing assessment of patient condition and prognosis. SETTING: Level I TICU in an independent academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Adult family members of patients hospitalized in the TICU > 24 hours; 88 families, 22 residents, 9 attendings, 81 nurses completed surveys on 78 unique patients. RESULTS: Family indicated: (1) they had easy access to medical information (91%); (2) the doctors (89%) and nurses (99%) listened carefully (p = 0.013); (3) they were included in morning rounds (80%); and (4) the doctors (91%) and nurses (98%) explained things well (p = 0.041). Family-surgeon agreement regarding the patient's condition and chance of cure was poor (28%) and fair (58%) respectively; families were typically more pessimistic than the surgeon regarding the patient's condition (65%), and more optimistic regarding chance of cure (26%). Residents cited mentors and skills practice with simulated patients as most influential training elements on communication style. CONCLUSIONS: Although families reported high-quality communication with the surgical team and rated physicians well in attributes related to trust, significant discordance in surgeon-family understanding of the patient's condition and prognosis persisted. This may be related to physician difficulty communicating complex information, or a family member's distress resulting in cognitive compromise, coupled with coping through hope and optimism. We recommend ongoing communication training for residents, skills practice for mentors, and open communication between nursing and physicians to optimize family information access.

Surgeon Communication and Family Understanding of Patient Prognosis in Critically Ill Surgical Patients: A Qualitative Investigation Informs Resident Training.

PURPOSE: Surgeons treating critically ill patients must work with family members making medical decisions for the patient. These surrogate decision makers depend on providers' high-quality communication and empathy to facilitate medical decisions. There is growing evidence of poor quality of communication and delayed family engagement in the intensive care unit, and of a decline in empathy over the course of a surgeon's clinical training. The aims of this study were to: (1) describe family understanding of patient prognosis among those admitted to our Trauma Intensive Care Unit (TICU), compared to the surgeon's assessment, and identify factors influencing the congruity of family-surgeon understanding ("congruence"); (2) characterize resident mentoring regarding difficult healthcare discussions and suggest adaptations to our communication program to address identified performance gaps. SETTING: Level I TICU in an independent academic medical center. METHODS: A qualitative research approach was valuable to discern the complexities of family understanding during highly stressful conditions. We enrolled adult family members of TICU patients, life expectancy <1 year, per attending. Using in-depth interviews we explored the family's experience with providers and the hospital system, and factors influencing understanding of the patient condition and decision making. We interviewed the surgical attending and/or resident separately to ascertain their perspective of the patient's condition and their experience with the family, as well as communication style, training, and influences on their approach. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed. Using the systematic, multistep, rigorous coding process of grounded theory, we identified a range of experiences and common themes, and developed theories and hypotheses regarding factors influencing our outcomes of interest. RESULTS: We enrolled, coded, and analyzed 31 interviews from 16 cases; the data painted a broad description of a complex situation. We developed a conceptual model of our hypothesized factors influencing congruence (Figure). Our data suggest that congruence varies widely, and is influenced by family-surgeon engagement quality, information accessed from other hospital and personal sources, and, significantly, hospital system factors. Family-surgeon engagement quality is influenced by family and physician factors, case complexity, and myriad hospital factors. Both "physician factors" and "family factors" include previous experience, personal history, and beliefs, as well as dynamic factors such as current experiences and stress level. We identify several opportunities to improve congruence by adapting our resident communication training program: providing practice assessing family knowledge, expectations, and current understanding of information shared, and focusing on building trust. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical residents receive formal communication training and focused mentoring to gain important skills; however, family members' understanding of their loved one's critical condition is influenced by myriad hospital system factors beyond case complexity and surgeon communication skills.

FRIEND or FOE: A prospective evaluation of risk factors for reintubation in surgical and trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: A Form for Re-Intubation Evaluation by Nurses and Doctors (FRIEND) was used to prospectively collect pre-extubation data, to determine failure of extubation (FOE) risk. METHODS: FRIENDs, including airway, breathing, and neurologic variables, were completed before extubation on trauma & surgical patients in one ICU from 1/1/16 to 5/31/17. Those with failed vs. successful extubation were compared. We excluded those with tracheostomy, comfort measures, or death before extubation. RESULTS: There were 464 eligible extubations in 436 patients. Thirty five reintubations (7.9% FOE rate) occurred in 32 patients within 96 h of extubation. FOE patients had higher ICU days (6 d vs. 2 d), ventilator days (6 d vs. 2 d), and mortality (15.6% vs. 2.7%) [all p < 0.001] compared to those without FOE. Odds of FOE (OR [CI]) increased with age (1.03, [1, 1.06]), delirium (3, [1.16, 7.76]), moderate/copious secretions (3.95, [1.46, 10.66]), and enteral opioid use (4.23, [1.28, 14.02]). CONCLUSIONS: Several characteristics present at the time of extubation were risk factors for FOE in trauma and surgical patients. Patients with FOE had higher mortality.

Are pediatric concussion patients compliant with discharge instructions?

BACKGROUND: Concussions are commonly diagnosed in pediatric patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). The primary objective of this study was to evaluate compliance with ED discharge instructions for concussion management. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted from November 2011 to November 2012 in a pediatric ED at a regional Level 1 trauma center, serving 35,000 pediatric patients per year. Subjects were aged 8 years to 17 years and were discharged from the ED with a diagnosis of concussion. Exclusion criteria included recent (past 3 months) diagnosis of head injury, hospital admission, intracranial injury, skull fracture, suspected nonaccidental trauma, or preexisting neurologic condition. Subjects were administered a baseline survey in the ED and were given standardized discharge instructions for concussion by the treating physician. Telephone follow-up surveys were conducted at 2 weeks and 4 weeks after ED visit. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients were enrolled. The majority (67%) of concussions were sports related. Among sports-related concussions, soccer (30%), football (11%), lacrosse (8%), and basketball (8%) injuries were most common. More than one third (39%) reported return to play (RTP) on the day of the injury. Physician follow-up was equivalent for sport and nonsport concussions (2 weeks, 58%; 4 weeks, 64%). Sports-related concussion patients were more likely to follow up with a trainer (2 weeks, 25% vs. 10%, p = 0.06; 4 weeks, 29% vs. 8%, p < 0.01). Of the patients who did RTP or normal activities at 2 weeks (44%), more than one third (35%) were symptomatic, and most (58%) did not receive medical clearance. Of the patients who had returned to activities at 4 weeks (64%), less than one quarter (23%) were symptomatic, and most (54%) received medical clearance. CONCLUSION: Pediatric patients discharged from the ED are mostly compliant with concussion instructions. However, a significant number of patients RTP on the day of injury, while experiencing symptoms or without medical clearance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management, level IV. Epidemiologic study, level III.

Definitive establishment of airway control is critical for optimal outcome in lower cervical spinal cord injury.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory complications can undermine outcome from low cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) (C5-T1). Most devastating of these is catastrophic loss of airway control. This study sought to determine the incidence and effect of catastrophic airway loss (CLA) and to define the need for elective intubation with subsequent tracheostomy to prevent potentially fatal outcomes. METHODS: A database of 54,838 consecutive patients treated in a level I trauma center between January 1988 and December 2004 was queried to identify patients with low cervical SCI, without traumatic brain injury. Patients were then stratified into complete or incomplete SCI groups, based on clinical assessment of their SCI. Mortality, age, injury severity, need for intubation, and tracheostomy were analyzed for each group using Fisher's exact test or Student's t test, as appropriate, accepting p < 0.05 as significant. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-six patients met inclusion criteria. The majority of low cervical spinal cord injuries were complete (58%). Overall, 127 (68%) patients required intubation, 88 (69%) required tracheostomy, and 27 died (15% of study population). Between each group there were significant differences in age and Injury Severity Score, however, within each group there were no significant differences in either. Eleven CSCI patients were not intubated; four of whom were at family request. Six of the remaining seven patients encountered fatal catastrophic airway loss. One patient was discharged to rehabilitation. Patients with incomplete SCI required intubation less frequently (38%); however, 50% of those required tracheostomy for intractable pulmonary failure. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that regardless of severity of low cervical SCI, immediate, thorough evaluation for respiratory failure is necessary. Early intubation is mandatory for CSCI patients. For incomplete patients evidence of respiratory failure should prompt immediate airway intervention, half of whom will require tracheostomy.

Best practice determination of timing of spinal fracture fixation as defined by analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.

BACKGROUND: To examine the efficacy of early versus late spinal fracture fixation, we reviewed National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) records to identify the breakpoint in reported timing of operative fixation. Using this breakpoint we then analyzed outcome for those treated early versus late, hypothesizing that the early group would experience better outcome as reflected by resource utilization and complications. METHODS: The NTDB was queried for patients with any level spinal fracture that required surgical stabilization. Histogram analysis of the postinjury day of initial operative fixation was used to determine the point at which the majority of operative procedures had been performed, thereby defining early (E) and late (L) groups. Patients in E were matched to a cohort from L with similar age, Injury Severity Score, and Glasgow Coma Scale. Outcome data included hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay, ventilator days, charges, incidence of complications, and mortality. The groups were compared using Student's t test for continuous variables and Fisher's exact test for categorical variables, accepting p < or = 0.05 as significant. RESULTS: Of 16,812 patients who underwent operative fixation, 59% were completed within 3 days of injury and formed E. The 374 L patients whose dataset was complete enough to allow analysis were matched to 497 E patients. There was no significant difference in the presence of spinal cord injury between E and L (51 vs. 48%; p = 0.3735). Complications were significantly higher in L (30% vs. 17.5%; p < 0.0001) yet mortality was similar in both groups (2.0% vs.1.9%; p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: NTDB records indicate that the majority of patients with spinal fractures undergo operative fixation within 3 days, and that these patients had less complications and required less resources. Use of a national data bank to compare groups with similar injury severity and presenting physiology can validate best practice and define opportunities for improvement in care.

The effect of early surgical treatment of traumatic spine injuries on patient mortality.

INTRODUCTION: The ideal timing of spinal fixation is controversial. A recent study showed that early spine fixation reduced morbidity and resource utilization. We previously noted a trend toward higher mortality in patients undergoing early spinal fixation. This study was done to analyze whether the timing of spinal fixation had a significant effect on mortality. METHODS: The registry of our Level I trauma program was queried for all patients with at least one spinal vertebral injury. Anatomic and physiologic variables included age, initial Glasgow Coma Scale score, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, and Injury Severity Score. Outcome was evaluated in terms of ventilator days, intensive care unit length of stay, hospital length of stay (HLOS), and mortality. Patients were stratified by day of spinal operative fixation as early when done within 48 hours and late when done after 48 hours. Data were analyzed using chi and an unpaired t test, accepting p < 0.05 as significant. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-one patients between January 1988 and February 2003 required operative spinal fixation (158 early, within 48 hours vs. 203 late, beyond 48 hours). There was no significant difference between the two groups except mortality, which was significantly higher in the early group (7.6 vs. 2.5%; p = 0.0257), and HLOS, which was significantly shorter in the early group (14.42 vs. 17.64 days; p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: Spinal fixation within 48 hours after vertebral fractures and dislocations appears to increase mortality despite similar anatomic and physiologic parameters in the later operative group. Incomplete resuscitation of patients before surgery may have contributed to this result. The shorter HLOS may have been because of the higher number of early deaths. Prospective studies to identify the optimal timing of spinal fixation and the reason for these outcome differences are warranted.

Urgent airway intervention: does outcome change with personnel performing the procedure?

BACKGROUND: Recent studies indicate that prehospital endotracheal intubation (PHEI) is associated with increased septic morbidity. Because the decision to intubate in the field is considered a life-sustaining mandate we analyzed our experience to validate these reports and to compare field intubation to that done in more controlled circumstances on patient arrival at the trauma center. METHODS: The registry of our Level l trauma center was queried from January 2002 through December 2003 for patients who required emergent EI and had a hospital stay > 2 days. Patients were stratified by site of EI into PHEI and trauma center intubation (TCEI). Demographic data (age, gender, Glasgow Comma Scale, Injury Severity Score) as well as outcome measures (incidence of pneumonia [PNA], Intensive Care Unit length of stay [ICU LOS], hospital length of stay [hospital LOS], and mortality) were compared between groups. Results were subjected to chi2 or unpaired t test, accepting p < 0.05 as significant. RESULTS: The 628 patients requiring EI consisted of 27l in PHEI and 357 in TCEL. When comparing these groups, PHEI were more severely injured (lower Glasgow Comma Scale score and higher Injury Severity Score), but had no other differences in demographics or in measured outcome variables. Within these groups, patients who developed PNA were comparable. They demonstrated similar time of onset of PNA after injury and had similar incidence of resistant organisms (46%). CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate no increased risk of PNA for urgent prehospital intubation. Moreover, the onset of PNA and the similar bacteriology is reflective of injury severity and not of additional infectious risk posed by these prehospital lifesaving maneuvers.

The burden of noncompliance with seat belt use on a trauma center.

INTRODUCTION: It is well-known that noncompliance with seat belt use results in worse injury. The impact of noncompliance on hospital resource consumption and hospital charges is less well known. This study was carried out to examine the economic burden of noncompliance with seat belt use. METHODS: Trauma registry data were reviewed for patients involved in motor vehicle crashes in 2003 and 2004. Routine demographic data were analyzed. Outcome data included hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay, number of ventilator days, and mortality. Hospital charges, rate of collection, hospital use (measured by need for admission), operating room use, and intensive care unit use were calculated to determine the burden of noncompliance with seat belt use. RESULTS: There were 3,426 patients identified for analysis. Of these patients, 1,744 (51%) were compliant with seat belt use (SEAT) while 1,682 were not compliant (NO SEAT). Patients in the NO SEAT group were significantly younger (31.2 versus 37.4 years old) and significantly more severely injured (Injury Severity Score of 11 versus 7) than those in the SEAT group. Patients in the NO SEAT group had a significantly longer hospital length of stay (4.4 versus 2.2 days) and intensive care unit length of stay (1.4 versus 0.3 days), as well as significantly more ventilator days (1.2 versus 0.2 days) than those in the SEAT group. Mortality was more than doubled in the NO SEAT group (2.2 versus 0.9%) as compared with the SEAT group. Resource consumption was significantly greater in the NO SEAT group, as evidenced by increased hospital use (64.9 versus 39%), increased critical care unit use (22.9 versus 10.3%) and increased operating room use (9.2 versus 4.9%) when compared with the SEAT group. Subsequently, hospital charges were significantly higher in the NO SEAT group ($32,138 versus $16,547) than in the SEAT group. Charge collection rate was lower in the NO SEAT group (30.5 versus 42.5%) than in the SEAT group. CONCLUSIONS: These data quantify the burden placed on a trauma center by noncompliance with seat belt use. This information should drive more focused education and injury prevention programs. It should also be clearly articulated to legislators to stimulate more support for more stringent legislative policy and improved trauma center funding.

The effect of early spine fixation on non-neurologic outcome.

INTRODUCTION: It has been shown that spinal fracture fixation within 3 days can reduce the incidence of pneumonia, length of stay, number of ventilator days, and hospital charges. Our institutional protocol calls for surgical stabilization of spinal fractures within 3 days of admission. We hypothesized that compliance with an early spinal fracture fixation protocol (within 3 days of admission) would improve non-neurologic outcome in patients with spinal fractures. METHODS: The trauma registry was queried for the period January 1988 through October 2001 to identify patients with spinal fractures requiring surgical stabilization. Patients were analyzed to determine the compliance with our protocol and to determine whether early spinal fixation can reduce the incidence of pneumonia, reduce length of stay, and reduce mortality. RESULTS: 1,741 patients with spinal fractures were identified. 299 (17.2%) required surgical stabilization. 174 (58.2%) had surgical stabilization within 3 days while 125 (41.8%) had surgical stabilization greater than 3 days from admission. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regards to age (37.9 versus 42.5), admission GCS (14.1 versus 13.9), or ISS (22 versus 20.8). The incidence of pneumonia was similar in both groups (21.8 versus 25.6%). The mortality was higher in the early group as compared with the late group (6.9 versus 2.5%), although it did not reach statistical significance. The hospital length of stay was significantly shorter (14.3 versus 21.1) for patients who had early spine fixation, however there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups with regards to intensive care unit length of stay (7.2 versus 7.9) or number of ventilator days (5.02 versus 1.9). Patients who were severely injured (ISS > 25) also had a significantly shorter hospital length of stay (19.6 versus 29.1) if they underwent early spinal fixation. Patients with thoracic spine injury and associated spinal cord injury had a significantly shorter HLOS (10.1 versus 30.5), ICULOS (2.3 versus 13.1), and lower incidence of pneumonia (6.5 versus 33.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Reasonable compliance with an early spinal fracture fixation protocol produced some outcome improvements in non-neurologic outcome. Early spine stabilization reduced hospital length of stay in all patients. Patients with thoracic spine trauma and a spinal cord injury had the greatest benefit in reduction of morbidity, HLOS and ICULOS from early stabilization. There was a trend toward poorer outcome in some groups with early spine stabilization. A rigid protocol requiring early surgical spine stabilization in all patients does not appear justified. Although early spine stabilization should be performed whenever possible to reduce hospital length of stay, the timing of this procedure should be individualized to allow patients with the most severe physiologic derangements to be optimized preoperatively.

Radiographic clearance of blunt cervical spine injury: plain radiograph or computed tomography scan?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the roles of cervical spine radiographs (CSR) and computed tomography of the cervical spine (CTC) in the exclusion of cervical spine injury for adult blunt trauma patients. METHODS: At the authors' institution, all adult blunt trauma patients with physical findings of posterior midline neck tenderness, altered mental status, or neurologic deficit are considered at risk of cervical spine injury and undergo both CSR and CTC for evaluation of the cervical spine. The TRACS database at level 1 of the trauma center at this institution was queried for all blunt trauma patients from November 2000 to October 2001. Patient injury severity score (ISS), Glascow Coma Score (GCS), age, gender, CSR results, CTC results, and treatment data were analyzed. RESULTS: The review included 3,018 blunt trauma patients with appropriate data. For 1,199 of these patients (779 men and 420 women) (40%) at risk for cervical spine injury, both CSR and CTC were performed for cervical spine evaluation. The average age of these patients was 39.4 years (range, 18-89 years). The average GCS was 13 and the average ISS was 8.4 in this study population. In 116 (9.5%) of these patients, a cervical spine injury (fracture or subluxation) was detected. The injury was identified on both CSR and CTC in 75 of these patients. In the remaining 41 patients (3.2%), the CSR results were negative, but injury was detected by CTC. All these injuries missed by CSR required treatment. For this group with false-negative CSR, the average GCS was 12 and the average ISS was 14.6. There were no missed cervical spine injuries among the patients with negative CTC results. CONCLUSION: No identifiable factors predicted false-negative CSR. There does not appear to be any role for CSR screening in this setting. The data from this study add to the growing body of evidence that CTC should replace CSR for the evaluation of the cervical spine in blunt trauma.

Two careers in one: an analysis of the earning power of certification in surgical critical care.

BACKGROUND: The core of general surgery supports multiple disciplines, each of which entails similar operative care for different diseases. The purpose of this study was to compare variations of practice patterns of four general surgeons to define the general surgical core that each shared in common, and to determine the effect of subspecialization in surgical critical care on the scope of practice and efficiency of revenue production. METHODS: The charges and collections of four members of the same surgical faculty were analyzed for the 6 months beginning July 1, 2000. Three members practiced general surgery with additional specialization in surgical oncology, surgical endoscopy, and trauma/critical care. The fourth covered all aspects of general surgery, including in-house trauma call, but not surgical critical care. Data were stratified by Current Procedural Terminology code and categorized as operative, bedside care (which included minor procedures), and evaluation/consultation care. Scope of practice was defined as the proportion of operative cases represented by the 10 most frequently performed procedures. General surgical core was defined as those cases that were preformed by all four surgeons at the same frequency. Efficiency of revenue generation was defined as collection rate for these procedures divided by the established, budgeted collection rate for each practitioner. All results were compared using chi(2) with significance accepted at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Fifteen operative procedures were performed with equal frequency by each surgeon and represented a broad spectrum of surgical disease. These procedures constituted a similar proportion of operative practice for all specialists (mean, 45.2%; 90% confidence limit, 3.5%), yet occupied 70% of the trauma surgeon's 10 most frequent surgical procedures versus 36% for the surgical oncology and surgical endoscopy. Charges generated by the provision of surgical critical care, especially in bedside procedures commonly performed in the intensive care unit, exceeded all of the other three surgeons and equaled the revenue generated by operative care. Although overall revenue-generating efficiency was less for the trauma surgeons (57% of eventual collections vs. 67%, chi(2) p = 0.1), immediate reimbursement for critical care was higher than for any other clinical services. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that subspecialization in surgical critical care provides valid additional earning capacity to surgical practitioners. Reimbursement is at least as good as for traditional operative care, and fees generated can actually exceed revenue from operative care. With impending decreases in global reimbursement, and attempts to unbundle operative fees, this additional capability becomes an important consideration in potential career choice, as well as a major component in the fiscal stability of trauma programs.