Injury-related emergency department visits and unplanned readmissions are associated with worse long-term mental and physical health.

BACKGROUND: The risk factors for unplanned emergency department (ED) visits and readmission after injury and the impact of these unplanned visits on long-term outcomes are not well understood. We aim to: 1) describe the incidence of and risk factors for injury-related ED visits and unplanned readmissions following injury and, 2) explore the relationship between these unplanned visits and mental and physical health outcomes 6-12 months post-injury. METHODS: Trauma patients with moderate-to-severe injury admitted to one of three Level-I trauma centers were asked to complete a phone survey to assess mental and physical health outcomes at 6-12 months. Patient reported data on injury-related ED visits and readmissions was collected. Multivariable regression analyses were performed controlling for sociodemographic and clinical variables to compare subgroups. RESULTS: Of 7,781 eligible patients, 4675 were contacted and 3,147 completed the survey and were included in the analysis. 194 (6.2%) reported an unplanned injury-related ED visit and 239 (7.6%) reported an injury-related readmission. Risk factors for injury-related ED visits included: younger age, Black race, a lower level of education, Medicaid insurance, baseline psychiatric or substance abuse disorder and penetrating mechanism. Risk factors for unplanned injury-related readmission included younger age, male sex, Medicaid insurance, substance abuse disorder, greater injury severity and penetrating mechanism of injury. Injury-related ED visits and readmissions were associated with significantly higher rates of PTSD, chronic pain and new injury-related functional limitations in addition to lower SF-12 mental and physical composite scores. CONCLUSIONS: Injury-related ED visits and unplanned readmissions are common after hospital discharge following treatment of moderate-severe injury and are associated with worse mental and physical health outcomes.

Perceived social support is strongly associated with recovery after injury.

BACKGROUND: The strength of one's social support network is a potentially modifiable factor that may have a significant impact on recovery after injury. We sought to assess the association between one's perceived social support (PSS) and physical and mental health outcomes 6 months to 12 months postinjury. METHODS: Moderate to severely injured patients admitted to one of three Level I trauma centers were asked to complete a phone-based survey assessing physical and mental health outcomes in addition to return to work and chronic pain 6 months to 12 months postinjury. Patients were also asked to rate the strength of their PSS on a 5-point Likert scale. Multivariate linear and logistic regression models were built to determine the association between PSS and postdischarge outcome metrics. RESULTS: Of 907 patients included in this study, 653 (72.0%) identified themselves as having very strong/strong, 182 (20.1%) as average, and 72 (7.9%) as weak/nonexistent PSS. Patients who reported a weak/nonexistent PSS were younger and were more likely to be male, Black, and to have a lower level of education than those who reported a very strong/strong PSS. After adjusting for potential confounders, patients with a weak/nonexistent PSS were more likely to have new functional limitations and chronic pain in addition to being less likely to be back at work/school and being more likely to screen positive for symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety at 6 months to 12 months postinjury than those with a strong/very strong PSS. CONCLUSION: Lower PSS is strongly correlated with worse functional and mental health outcome metrics postdischarge. The strength of one's social support network should be considered when trying to identify patients who are at greatest risk for poor postdischarge outcomes after injury. Our data also lend support to creating a system wherein we strive to build a stronger support network for these high-risk individuals. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/epidemiologic, level III.

Bilateral internal iliac artery embolization for pelvic trauma: Effectiveness and safety.

INTRODUCTION: Bilateral internal iliac artery embolization (BIIAE) with temporary embolic materials epitomizes damage-control principles in the treatment of exsanguinating hemorrhage from pelvic trauma. However, instances of ischemic complications have been reported. The aim of our study was to assess safety and effectiveness of BIIAE. METHODS: All patients who received BIIAE for pelvic trauma at a Level I Trauma Center between 1998 and 2018 were reviewed. Effectiveness was assessed by radiographic bleeding control and clinical bleeding control, i.e. stabilization of vital signs and reduction in blood transfusion. Safety was assessed by any evidence for ischemic damage of pelvic organs or tissues. RESULTS: Of 61 patients undergoing BIIAE, bleeding control was confirmed radiographically in 60 (98%) and clinically in 55 (90%), including 4 (7%) patients who required repeat embolization. Six (10%) patients died due to insufficient pelvic bleeding control. No BIIAE-related complications were identified. CONCLUSION: The overall clinical effectiveness and safety rates of BIIAE for pelvic bleeding control, when combined with other methods of hemostasis, were 90% and 100% respectively.