Characteristics of Firearm Injury by Injury Intent: The Need for Tailored Interventions.

INTRODUCTION: While the U.S. has high quality data on firearm-related deaths, less information is available on those who arrive at trauma centers alive, especially those discharged from the emergency department. This study sought to describe characteristics of patients arriving to trauma centers alive following a firearm injury, postulating that significant differences in firearm injury intent might provide insights into injury prevention strategies. METHODS: This was a multi-center prospective cohort study of patients treated for firearm-related injuries at 128 U.S. trauma centers from 3/2021-2/2022. Data collected included patient-level sociodemographic, injury and clinical characteristics, community characteristics, and context of injury. The outcome of interest was the association between these factors and the intent of firearm injury. Measures of urbanicity, community distress, and strength of state firearm laws were utilized to characterize patient communities. RESULTS: 15,232 patients presented with firearm-related injuries across 128 centers in 41 states. Overall, 9.5% of patients died, and deaths were more common among law enforcement and self-inflicted (SI) firearm injuries (80.9% and 50.5%, respectively). These patients were also more likely to have a history of mental illness. SI firearm injuries were more common in older White men from rural and less distressed communities, whereas firearm assaults were more common in younger, Black men from urban and more distressed communities. Unintentional injuries were more common among younger patients and in states with lower firearm safety grades whereas law enforcement-related injuries occurred most often in unemployed patients with a history of mental illness. CONCLUSIONS: Injury, clinical, sociodemographic, and community characteristics among patients injured by a firearm significantly differed between intents. With the goal of reducing firearm-related deaths, strategies and interventions need to be tailored to include community improvement and services that address specific patient risk factors for firearm injury intent. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Prognostic/Epidemiological.

Health Care Utilization After Nonfatal Firearm Injuries.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the high incidence of firearm injuries, little is known about health care utilization after nonfatal childhood firearm injuries. This study aimed to describe health care utilization and costs after a nonfatal firearm injury among Medicaid and commercially insured youth using a propensity score matched analysis. METHODS: We conducted a propensity score matched cohort analysis using 2015 to 2018 Medicaid and Commercial Marketscan data comparing utilization in the 12-months post firearm injury for youth aged 0 to 17. We matched youth with a nonfatal firearm injury 1:1 to comparison noninjured youth on demographic and preindex variables. Outcomes included inpatient hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and outpatient visits as well as health care costs. Following propensity score matching, regression models estimated relative risks of the health care utilization outcomes, adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates. RESULTS: We identified 2110 youth with nonfatal firearm injury. Compared with matched noninjured youth, firearm injured youth had a 5.31-fold increased risk of inpatient hospitalization (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.93-7.20), 1.49-fold increased risk of ED visit (95% CI 1.37-1.62), and 1.06-fold increased risk of outpatient visit (95% CI 1.03-1.10) 12-months postinjury. Adjusted 12-month postindex costs were $7581 (95% CI $7581-$8092) for injured youth compared with $1990 (95% CI $1862-2127) for comparison noninjured youth. CONCLUSIONS: Youth who suffer nonfatal firearm injury have a significantly increased risk of hospitalizations, ED visits, outpatient visits, and costs in the 12 months after injury when compared with matched youth. Applied to the 11 258 US youth with nonfatal firearm injuries in 2020, estimates represent potential population health care savings of $62.9 million.

Firearm injuries in Missouri.

Firearm deaths continue to be a major public health problem, but the number of non-fatal firearm injuries and the characteristics of patients and injuries is not well known. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma, with support from the National Collaborative on Gun Violence Research, leveraged an existing data system to capture lethal and non-lethal injuries, including patients treated and discharged from the emergency department and collect additional data on firearm injuries that present to trauma centers. In 2020, Missouri had the 4th highest firearm mortality rate in the country at 23.75/100,000 population compared to 13.58/100,000 for the US overall. We examined the characteristics of patients from Missouri with firearm injuries in this cross-sectional study. Of the overall 17,395 patients, 1,336 (7.7%) were treated at one of the 11 participating trauma centers in Missouri during the 12-month study period. Patients were mostly male and much more likely to be Black and uninsured than residents in the state as a whole. Nearly three-fourths of the injuries were due to assaults, and overall 7.7% died. Few patients received post-discharge services.

Firearm Injuries treated at Trauma Centers in the United States.

BACKGROUND: While firearm injuries and deaths continue to be a major public health problem, the number of non-fatal firearm injuries and the characteristics of patients is not well known. The American College of Surgeons (ACS) Committee on Trauma leveraged an existing data system to collect additional data on fatal and non-fatal firearm injuries presenting to trauma centers. This report provides an overview of this initiative and highlights the challenges associated with capturing actionable data on firearm-injured patients. METHODS: 128 trauma centers that are part of the ACS Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) collected data on individuals of any age arriving alive between March 1, 2021 and February 28, 2022 with a firearm injury. In addition to the standard data collected for TQIP, abstractors also extracted additional data specific to this study. We linked data from the Distressed Community Index (DCI) to patient records using zip code of residence. RESULTS: A total of 17,395 patients were included, with mean (SD) age of 30.2 (13.5) years, 82.5% were male and the majority were Black and non-Hispanic. The mean proportion of variables with missing data varied among trauma centers, with a mean of 20.7% missing data. Injuries occurred most commonly in homes (31.2%) or on the street (26.6%); 70.4% of injuries were due to assaults. Nearly one-third of patients were discharged from the ED, 25.9% were admitted directly to the operating room, 10.9% to the ICU; 5.9% died in the ED and 10.3% died overall during their course of care. Nearly two-thirds of patients lived in the two highest distressed categories of communities; only 7.5% lived in the least distressed quintile. CONCLUSIONS: Utilizing trauma center data can be a valuable tool to improve our knowledge of firearm injuries if clinical practices and documentation of patient risks and circumstances are standardized. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III Level, epidemiological.

Mental Health Care Utilization Among Children and Adolescents With a Firearm Injury.

Importance: Firearm injuries are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among US children and adolescents. Despite evidence demonstrating mental health sequelae for children and adolescents who have experienced a firearm injury, little is known about mental health care utilization after a firearm injury. Objective: To evaluate mental health care utilization in the 12 months after a firearm injury among Medicaid-insured and commercially insured children and adolescents compared with propensity score-matched controls. Design, Setting, and Participants: This propensity score-matched retrospective cohort analysis assessed 2127 children and adolescents, aged 0 to 17 years, with a firearm injury that occurred between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2017, compared with 2127 matched controls using MarketScan Medicaid and commercial claims data. Claims data were analyzed 12 months before and after injury, with the total study period spanning from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2018. Exposure: Nonfatal firearm injury. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of interest was a dichotomous variable representing any mental health care utilization in the 12 months after injury. Secondary outcomes included psychotherapy utilization, substance use-related utilization, and a psychotropic medication prescription. Logistic regression modeling was used to estimate relative risks with adjusted analyses of dichotomous outcomes. Results: The overall cohort consisted of 4254 children and adolescents, of whom 2127 (mean [SD] age, 13.5 [4.1] years; 1722 [81.0%] male) had an initial encounter for a firearm injury and an equal number of matched controls (mean [SD] age, 13.5 [4.1] years; 1720 [80.9%] male). Children and adolescents with a firearm injury had a 1.40 times greater risk (95% CI, 1.25-1.56; P < .001) of utilizing mental health services in the 12 months after their injury compared with children and adolescents without a firearm injury, after controlling for potential confounders. Children and adolescents with a firearm injury had a 1.23 times greater risk (95% CI, 1.06-1.43; P = .007) of utilizing psychotherapy and a 1.40 times greater risk (95% CI, 1.19-1.64; P < .001) of substance use-related utilization. Among those who experienced a firearm injury, Black children and adolescents were 1.64 times more likely (95% CI, 1.23-2.19; P < .001) to utilize mental health care compared with White children and adolescents. Conclusions and Relevance: This propensity score-matched cohort study found that children and adolescents with a firearm injury had a greater risk of utilizing mental health services in the 12 months after their injury compared with those without an injury, and significant racial disparities were associated with use of mental health services. The findings suggest that health care practitioners should be aware of this increased risk and ensure adequate mental health follow-up for these patients.

Differences in mental health engagement and follow-up among Black and White patients after traumatic injury.

BACKGROUND: Severe injury necessitating hospitalization is experienced by nearly three million US adults annually. Posttraumatic stress disorder and depression are prevalent clinical outcomes. The mechanisms by which programs equitably promote mental health recovery among trauma-exposed patients are understudied. We evaluated clinical outcomes and engagement among a cohort of Black and White patients enrolled in the Trauma Resilience and Recovery Program (TRRP), a stepped-care model to accelerate mental health recovery after traumatic injury. METHODS: Trauma Resilience and Recovery Program is a four-step model that includes (1) bedside psychoeducation about mental health recovery following traumatic injury, (2) a text-messaging symptom tracking system, (3) a 30-day postinjury mental health screen, and (4) referrals to mental health services. Data describe 1,550 patients enrolled in TRRP within a Level I trauma center ( Mage = 40.86; SD, 17.32), 611 of whom identified as Black (74.5% male) and 939 of whom identified as White (67.7% male). RESULTS: Enrollment in TRRP was nearly universal (97.9%) regardless of race or injury mechanism. Enrollment and usage of the text-message system were statistically similar between Black (35.7%) and White patients (39.5%). Trauma Resilience and Recovery Program reengaged Black and White patients at a similar rate at the 30-day postinjury follow-up. However, Black patients were more likely to report peritraumatic distress at the bedside and clinical elevations in posttraumatic stress disorder and depression on the 30-day screen. Referrals were more likely to be accepted by Black patients relative to White patients with clinically elevated symptoms. CONCLUSION: Enrollment and engagement were comparable among Black and White patients served by TRRP. Data provide preliminary evidence to suggest that TRRP is feasible and acceptable and engages patients in mental health follow-up equitably. However, research that includes careful measurement of social determinants of health and long-term follow-up examining initiation, completion, and benefit from treatment is needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Adolescent Suicide-Understanding Unique Risks and Opportunities for Trauma Centers to Recognize, Intervene, and Prevent a Leading Cause of Death.

Purpose of Review: This provides up-to-date epidemiology of adolescent suicide and risk factors for suicide and highlights the overlap of risks for suicide and injury. It reviews signs and symptoms, and the up-to-date evidence on screening for depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), suicide, substance abuse, and lethal means, and offers strategies of implementation in trauma centers. Recent Findings: The incidence of adolescent suicide has continued to rise in the USA to 6.5 per 100,000, with notable racial disparities. The risk factors are complex, but many pre-existing risk factors and sequela after injury such as exposures to violence, suicidal behaviors, substance abuse, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, and specific injuries including traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury have further emerged as risks. Studies show rates of suicidality as high as 30% in the acute care setting. There are short screening instruments that can be used to universally screen for depression and suicidality in adolescent trauma patients. Step-up models of care for PTSD are promising to increase screening and services after injury. Lethal means counseling, secure firearm storage practices, and firearm safety policies can reduce the risk of suicide. Summary: Suicide is the second leading cause of death in US adolescents, and trauma patients have significant risk factors for mental illness and suicidality before and after injury. Trauma centers should strongly consider screening adolescents, establish strategies for mental health support and referrals, and provide lethal means counseling to help prevent suicide.

Pediatric Firearm Injury Mortality Epidemiology.

Firearm injury is a leading and preventable cause of death for youth in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention web-based injury statistics query and reporting system was queried to examine changes in firearm injury mortality among youth aged 0 to 19 from 2001 to 2019. This includes assessment of overall mortality rates, mortality rates based on intent and race/ethnicity, and the proportion of deaths due to homicide, suicide, and unintentional shootings among different age groups. Regression analysis was used to identify significant differences in mortality rate over time between Black and White youth. Deaths due to firearm injury were compared with deaths due to motor vehicle traffic collisions. In 2019, firearm injuries surpassed motor vehicle collisions to become the leading cause of death for youth aged 0 to 19 years in the United States. Homicide is the most common intent across all age groups, but suicide represents a large proportion of firearm deaths in 10- to 19-year-old youth. In 2019, Black youth had a firearm mortality rate 4.3 times higher than that of White youth and a firearm homicide rate over 14 times higher than that of White youth. For each additional year after 2013, the mortality rate for Black youth increased by 0.55 deaths per 100 000 compared with White youth (time by race interaction effect P < .0001). These data indicate the growing burden of firearm injuries on child mortality and widening racial inequities with Black youth disproportionately affected by firearm violence. This public health crisis demands physician advocacy to reduce these preventable deaths among youth.

Not All Survivors Are the Same: Qualitative Assessment of Prior Violence, Risks, Recovery and Perceptions of Firearms and Violence Among Victims of Firearm Injury.

Qualitative exploration into the risk, experiences, and outcomes of victims of firearm injury is imperative to informing not only further research, but prevention and intervention strategies. The purpose of this study was to explore prior violent exposures, risks, recovery, supportive services, outcomes, and views of firearms and violence among survivors of firearm assaults and unintentional injuries. Adults treated at a level 1 trauma center in Seattle, WA, for assault and unintentional firearm injuries were interviewed utilizing a semistructured instrument. Interview responses were coded to identify common themes and representative quotes are reported. Sixteen participants were interviewed. Notable themes included the following: (a) prior violent exposures were experienced by half of survivors, mostly through community violence; (b) risk for firearm injury was felt to be related to general societal violence, unsafe communities, and firearm practices; (c) important aspects of recovery included family/social support, mental health care and financial support services; (d) notable outcomes included psychological problems such as PTSD and anxiety, changes in relationships, and developing a new sense of purpose or mission in life; (e) generally negative views toward firearms, supporting restricted access and firearm safety practices; (f) acknowledgement of the complexity of firearm violence in society with prevention geared toward equitable education, economic opportunities and safety net programs to reduce community violence; and (g) disappointment in the criminal justice system. These findings demonstrate the varied experiences, needs, and outcomes after injury, but highlight the significance of community and societal violence, and need for improved mental health services. Integration of mental health services and victim assistance programs into trauma centers and hospital-based violence intervention programs is imperative for all survivors. Encouraging survivors to engage in new aspirations after injury can be empowering, and there is an unmet need for victim support and advocacy within the criminal justice system.

Increase in Mental Health Diagnoses Among Youth With Nonfatal Firearm Injuries.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Firearm injury is a leading cause of mortality for US youth. For every youth who dies from a firearm injury, at least 4 more survive. Little is known about the mental health consequences of non-fatal firearm injury in youth. Our objective was to quantify new mental health diagnoses after nonfatal firearm injury. METHODS: MarketScan Medicaid and commercial data were used to identify youth age 0 to 17 years with an initial encounter for a nonfatal firearm injury in 2016 to 2017. The International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes determined the presence of mental health conditions in the 12 months preinjury, during the index encounter, and in the 12 months postinjury. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors associated with new mental health diagnoses during the 12 months postinjury. RESULTS: About 2178 patients (1769 Medicaid, 409 commercial) were identified for inclusion. 844 (38.8%) patients had a mental health diagnosis identified during the 12-month preinjury period. During the index encounter, 184 (8.5%) patients had a newly diagnosed mental health disorder. In the 12 months postinjury, 559 (25.7%) patients had a newly diagnosed mental health disorder. The most common new diagnosis categories were trauma disorders, substance abuse, and disruptive disorders. Medicaid insurance and a prior complex chronic condition were predictors of new mental health diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Over a quarter of youth with nonfatal firearm injury were diagnosed with a new mental health condition in the 12 months after their injury. Health care providers should be vigilant about mental health screening and ensuring access to mental health care services in this population.

Development of a Sterile Personal Protective Equipment Donning and Doffing Procedure to Protect Surgical Teams from SARS-CoV-2 Exposure during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become an increasingly challenging problem throughout the world. Because of the numerous potential modes of transmission, surgeons and all procedural staff represent a unique population that requires standardized procedures to protect themselves and their patients. Although several protocols have been implemented during other infectious disease outbreaks, such as Ebola virus, no standardized protocol has been published in regard to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A multidisciplinary team of two surgeons, an anesthesiologist, and an infection preventionist was assembled to create a process with sterile attire adapted from the National Emerging Special Pathogen Training and Education Center (NETEC) donning and doffing process. After editing, a donning procedure and doffing procedure was created and made into checklists. The procedures were simulated in an empty operating room (OR) with simulation of all personnel roles. A "dofficer" role was established to ensure real-time adherence to the procedures. Results: The donning and doffing procedures were printed as one-page documents for easy posting in ORs and procedural areas. Pictures from the simulation were also obtained and made into flow chart-style diagrams that were also posted in the ORs. Conclusions: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a quickly evolving pandemic that has spread all over the globe. With the rapid increase of infections and the increasing number of severely ill individuals, healthcare providers need easy-to-follow guidelines to keep themselves and patients as safe as possible. The processes for donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE) presented here provide an added measure of safety to surgeons and support staff to provide quality surgical care to positive and suspected COVID-19-positive patients.

Risks go beyond the violence: Association between intimate partner violence, mental illness, and substance abuse among females admitted to a rural Level I trauma center.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a significant cause of intentional injury among women but remains underrecognized, and its relationship to other risk factors for all-cause injury remains poorly defined. This study aimed to assess IPV and its association with alcohol abuse, illicit substance use, selected mental illnesses, and other risk factors for injury. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study of prospectively collected data among adult females admitted to a rural, Level I trauma center. Well-validated instruments assessed IPV, substance abuse, and mental illness. Bivariate relationships were assessed with χ, odds ratios, and t test analyses. RESULTS: Eighty-one women were enrolled; 51% reported lifetime IPV, and 31% reported past-year IPV. Both groups were significantly more likely to have a mental illness than those without a history of IPV. Those reporting lifetime IPV exposure were significantly more likely to report illicit substance use, and past-year IPV was associated with alcohol abuse (28% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.01). Participants reporting past-year IPV were significantly more likely to have a partner possessing a firearm (40% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: The experience of lifetime and past-year IPV among women at a Level I, rural trauma center was high, and it was significantly associated with mental illness, substance abuse, and high-risk scenarios for intentional injury including firearm ownership by a significant other. These findings inform the potential value of IPV screening and intervention and suggest that IPV, mental illness, and substance abuse should be considered associated entities in prevention and recidivism reduction efforts in the female trauma population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level II; therapeutic study, level III.