The patient's voice matters: The impact of advance directives on elderly trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric trauma rates are increasing, yet trauma centers often struggle to provide autonomy regarding decision making to these patients. Advance care planning can assist with this process. Currently, there are limited data on the impact of advance directives (ADs) in elderly trauma patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of preinjury AD in geriatric trauma patients and its impact on outcomes, with the hypothesis that ADs would not be associated with an increase in mortality. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective review was conducted on patients older than 65 years with traumatic injury between 2017 and 2019. Three Level I trauma centers and one Level II trauma center were included. Exclusion criteria were readmission, burn injury, transfer to another facility, discharge from emergency department, and mortality prior to being admitted. RESULTS: There were 6,135 patients identified; 751 (12.2%) had a preinjury AD. Patients in the AD+ group were older (86 vs. 77 years, p < 0.0001), more likely to be women (67.0% vs. 54.8%, p < 0.0001), and had more comorbidities. Hospital length of stay and ventilator days were similar. In-hospital mortality occurred in 236 patients, and 75.4% of them underwent withdrawal of care (WOC). The mortality rate was higher in AD+ group (10.5% vs. 2.9%, p < 0.0001). No difference was seen in the rate of AD between the WOC+ and WOC- group (31.5% vs. 39.6%, p = 0.251). A preinjury AD was identified as an independent predictor of mortality, but not a predictor of WOC. CONCLUSION: Despite a high WOC rate in patients older than 65 years, most patients did not have an AD prior to injury. As the elderly trauma population grows, advance care planning should be better integrated into geriatric care to encourage a patient-centered approach to end-of-life care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and epidemiological, level IV.

Whole Blood Versus Conventional Blood Component Massive Transfusion Protocol Therapy in Civilian Trauma Patients.

BACKGROUND: Military data demonstrating an improved survival rate with whole blood (WB) have led to a shift toward the use of WB in civilian trauma. The purpose of this study is to compare a low-titer group O WB (LTOWB) massive transfusion protocol (MTP) to conventional blood component therapy (BCT) MTP in civilian trauma patients. METHODS: Trauma patients 15 years or older who had MTP activations from February 2019 to December 2020 were included. Patients with a LTOWB MTP activation were compared to BCT MTP patients from a historic cohort. RESULTS: 299 patients were identified, 169 received LTOWB and 130 received BCT. There were no differences in age, gender, or injury type. The Injury Severity Score was higher in the BCT group (27 vs 25, P = .006). The LTOWB group had a longer transport time (33 min vs 26 min, P < .001) and a lower arrival temperature (35.8 vs 36.1, P < .001). Other hemodynamic parameters were similar between the groups. The LTOWB group had a lower in-hospital mortality rate compared to the BCT group (19.5% vs 30.0%, P = .035). There were no differences in total transfusion volumes at 4 hours and 24 hours. No differences were seen in transfusion reactions or hospital complications. Multivariable logistic regression identified ISS, age, and 24-hour transfusion volume as predictors of mortality. DISCUSSION: Resuscitating severely injured trauma patient with LTOWB is safe and may be associated with an improved survival.