A novel computerized approach to scoping reviews using Synthesis software: the first 15 years of The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

Scoping reviews of innovations in health care characterized by large numbers and types of publications present a unique challenge. A novel software application, Synthesis, can efficiently scan the literature to map the evidence and inform practice. We applied Synthesis to the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), a high-quality database designed to measure risk-adjusted 30-day surgical outcomes for national and international benchmarking. The scoping review describes the breadth of studies in the NSQIP literature. We performed a comprehensive electronic literature search using PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge and Scopus to capture all NSQIP articles published between Jan. 1, 2000, and Dec. 31, 2020. Two reviewers independently reviewed articles to determine their relevance using predefined inclusion criteria. We imported references into Synthesis to semiautomate data management. Extracted data included surgical specialty, study type and year of publication. Of the 4661 NSQIP articles included, 3631 (77.9%) were published within the last 5 years. Among NSQIP-related articles, the most common study types were based on outcomes (46.7%) and association (41.7%), and the most common surgical specialties were general surgery and orthopedic surgery, representing 35.7% and 24.0% of the articles, respectively. Synthesis enabled a rapid review of thousands of NSQIP publications. The scoping review provided an overview of the articles in the NSQIP literature and suggested that the NSQIP is increasingly being described in publications of quality and safety in surgery.

Validation of Quality Indicators Targeting Low-Value Trauma Care.

Importance: Reducing low-value care has the potential to improve patient experiences and outcomes and free up health care resources. Sixteen quality indicators were recently developed targeting reductions in low-value trauma care based on a synthesis of the best available evidence, expert consensus, and patient preferences. Objective: To assess the validity of quality indicators on low-value trauma care using trauma registry data. Design, Setting, and Participants: Data from an inclusive Canadian provincial trauma system were used in this analysis. Included were all admissions for injury to any of the 57 provincial adult trauma centers between April 1, 2013, and March 31, 2020. Metrics for quality indicators were developed iteratively with clinical experts. Main Outcomes and Measures: Validity was assessed using a priori criteria based on 5 parameters: frequency (incidence and case volume), discrimination (interhospital variation), construct validity (correlation with quality indicators on high-value care), predictive validity (correlation with quality indicators on risk-adjusted outcomes), and forecasting (correlation over time). Results: The study sample included 136 783 patient admissions (mean [SD] age, 63 [22] years; 68 428 men [50%]). Metrics were developed for 12 of the 16 quality indicators. Six quality indicators showed moderate or high validity on all measurable parameters: initial head, cervical spine, or whole-body computed tomography for low-risk patients; posttransfer repeated computed tomography; neurosurgical consultation for mild complicated traumatic brain injury; and spine service consultation for isolated thoracolumbar process fractures. Red blood cell transfusion in low-risk patients had low frequency but had moderate or high validity on all other parameters. Five quality indicators had low validity on at least 2 parameters: repeated head CT and intensive care unit admission for mild complicated traumatic brain injury, hospital admission for minor blunt abdominal trauma, orthosis for thoracolumbar burst fractures, and surgical exploration in penetrating neck injury without hard signs. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study shows the feasibility of assessing low-value trauma care using routinely collected data. It provided data on quality indicators properties that can be used to decide which quality indicators are most appropriate in a given system. Results suggest that 6 quality indicators have moderate to high validity. Their implementation now needs to be tested.

Quality Indicators Targeting Low-Value Clinical Practices in Trauma Care.

Importance: The use of quality indicators has been shown to improve injury care processes and outcomes. However, trauma quality indicators proposed to date exclusively target the underuse of recommended practices. Initiatives such as Choosing Wisely publish lists of practices to be questioned, but few apply to trauma care, and most have not successfully been translated to quality indicators. Objective: To develop a set of evidence and patient-informed, consensus-based quality indicators targeting reductions in low-value clinical practices in acute, in-hospital trauma care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 2-round Research and Development/University of California at Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) consensus study, conducted from April 20 to June 9, 2021, comprised an online questionnaire and a virtual workshop led by 2 independent moderators. Two panels of international experts from Canada, Australia, the US, and the UK, and local stakeholders from Québec, Canada, represented key clinical expertise involved in trauma care and included 3 patient partners. Main Outcomes and Measures: Panelists were asked to rate 50 practices on a 7-point Likert scale according to 4 quality indicator criteria: importance, supporting evidence, actionability, and measurability. Results: Of 49 eligible experts approached, 46 (94%; 18 experts [39%] aged ≥50 years; 37 men [80%]) completed at least 1 round and 36 (73%) completed both rounds. Eleven quality indicators were selected overall, 2 more were selected by the international panel and a further 3 by the local stakeholder panel. Selected indicators targeted low-value clinical practices in the following aspects of trauma care: (1) initial diagnostic imaging (head, cervical spine, ankle, and pelvis), (2) repeated diagnostic imaging (posttransfer computed tomography [CT] and repeated head CT), (3) consultation (neurosurgical and spine), (4) surgery (penetrating neck injury), (5) blood product administration, (6) medication (antibiotic prophylaxis and late seizure prophylaxis), (7) trauma service admission (blunt abdominal trauma), (8) intensive care unit admission (mild complicated traumatic brain injury), and (9) routine blood work (minor orthopedic surgery). Conclusions and Relevance: In this consensus study, a set of consensus-based quality indicators were developed that were informed by the best available evidence and patient priorities, targeting low-value trauma care. Selected indicators represented a trauma-specific list of practices, the use of which should be questioned. Trauma quality programs in high-income countries may use these study results as a basis to select context-specific quality indicators to measure and reduce low-value care.

Peri-Operative Care.

In the history of surgery, 1911 was a sentinel year [...].

Value of repeat CT for nonoperative management of patients with blunt liver and spleen injury: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of routine repeat computed tomography (CT) for nonoperative management (NOM) of adults with blunt liver and/or spleen injury. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental and observational studies of repeat CT in adult patients with blunt abdominal injury. We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central from their inception to October 2020 using Cochrane guidelines. Primary outcomes were change in clinical management (e.g., emergency surgery, embolization, blood transfusion, clinical surveillance), mortality, and complications. Secondary outcomes were hospital readmission and length of stay. RESULTS: Search results yielded 1611 studies of which 28 studies including 2646 patients met our inclusion criteria. The majority reported on liver (n = 9) or spleen injury (n = 16) or both (n = 3). No RCTs were identified. Meta-analyses were not possible because no study performed direct comparisons of study outcomes across intervention groups. Only seven of the twenty-eight studies reported whether repeat CT was routine or prompted by clinical indication. In these 7 studies, among the 254 repeat CT performed, 188 (74%) were routine and 8 (4%) of these led to a change in clinical management. Of the 66 (26%) repeated CT prompted by clinical indication, 31 (47%) led to a change in management. We found no data allowing comparison of any other outcomes across intervention groups. CONCLUSION: Routine repeat CT without clinical indication is not useful in the management of patients with liver and/or spleen injury. However, effect estimates were imprecise and included studies were of low methodological quality. Given the risks of unnecessary radiation and costs associated with repeat CT, future research should aim to estimate the frequency of such practices and assess practice variation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses, Level II.

Complications of appendectomy and cholecystectomy in acute care surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Acute care surgery (ACS) was initiated two decades ago to address timeliness and quality in emergency general surgery. We hypothesized that ACS has improved the management of acute appendicitis and biliary disease. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of outcome studies for emergent appendectomy and cholecystectomy from 1966 to 2017, comparing studies prior to and following ACS implementation, were performed. RESULTS: Of 1,704 studies, 27 were selected for analysis (appendicitis, 16; biliary pathology, 7; both, 4). Following ACS introduction, the complication rate was significantly reduced in both appendectomy and cholecystectomy (risk ratios, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.85; I = 9.2% and relative risk, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41-0.94; I = 63.5%) respectively. There was a significant reduction in the time from arrival in emergency until admission and from admission to operation (-1.37 hours: 95% CI, -1.93 to -0.80; -2.51 hours: 95% CI, -4.44 to -0.58) in the appendectomy cohort. Time to operation was shorter in the cholecystectomy group (-6.46 hours; 95% CI, -9.54 to -3.4). Length of hospital stay was reduced in both groups (appendectomy, -0.9 day; cholecystectomy, -1.09 day). There was a reduction in overall cost in cholecystectomy group (-US $854.37; 95% CI, -1,554.1 to -154.05). No statistical significance was detected for wound infection, abscess, conversion of laparoscopy to open technique, rate of negative appendectomy, after hours, readmission, and cost. CONCLUSION: The implementation of ACS models in general surgery emergency care has significantly improved system and patient outcomes for appendicitis and biliary pathology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis of a retrospective study, level III.

A 30-day prospective audit of all inpatient complications following acute care surgery: How well do we really perform?

Background: Acute care surgery (ACS) and emergency general surgery (EGS) services must provide timely care and intervention for patients who have some of the most challenging needs. Patients treated by ACS services are often critically ill and have both substantial comorbidities and poor physiologic reserve. Despite the widespread implemention of ACS/EGS services across North America, the true postoperative morbidity rates remain largely unknown. Methods: In this prospective study, inpatients at 8 high-volume ACS/EGS centres in geographically diverse locations in Canada who underwent operative interventions were followed for 30 days or until they were discharged. Readmissions during the 30-day window were also captured. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative variables were tracked. Standard statistical methodology was employed. Results: A total of 601 ACS/EGS patients were followed for up to 30 inpatient or readmission days after their index emergent operation. Fifty-one percent of patients were female, and the median age was 51 years. They frequently had substantial medical comorbidities (42%) and morbid obesity (15%). The majority of procedures were minimally invasive (66% laparoscopic). Median length of stay was 3.3 days and the early readmission (< 30 d) rate was 6%. Six percent of patients were admitted to the critical care unit. The overall complication and mortality rates were 34% and 2%, respectively. Cholecystitis (31%), appendicitis (21%), bowel obstruction (18%), incarcerated hernia (12%), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (7%) and soft tissue infections (7%) were the most common diagnoses. The morbidity and mortality rates for open surgical procedures were 73% and 5%, respectively. Conclusion: Nontrauma ACS/EGS procedures are associated with a high postoperative morbidity rate. This study will serve as a prospective benchmark for postoperative complications among ACS/EGS patients and subsequent quality improvement across Canada.

Contexte: Les services de chirurgie dans les unités de soins actifs (CSA) et de chirurgie générale dans les services d'urgence (CGSU) doivent fournir rapidement des soins et des interventions à des patients dont les besoins sont parmi les plus complexes. En effet, les patients pris en charge par les services de CSA sont souvent gravement malades et présentent des comorbidités sur fond de faible réserve physiologique. Même si les services de CSA/CGSU se sont répandus en Amérique du Nord, les taux réels de morbidité postopératoire demeurent pour une bonne part inconnus. Méthodes: Dans cette étude prospective, on a suivi pendant 30 jours ou jusqu'à leur congé, les patients hospitalisés pour des interventions chirurgicales dans 8 centres de CSA/CGSU achalandés de divers endroits au Canada. On a également tenu compte des réadmissions dans les 30 jours. Les paramètres pré-, per- et postopératoires ont été enregistrés. Une méthodologie statistique standard a été appliquée. Résultats: En tout, 601 patients de CSA/CGSU ont ainsi été suivis pendant une durée allant jusqu'à 30 jours d'hospitalisation ou de réadmission après leur intervention urgente initiale. Cinquante et un pour cent étaient de sexe féminin et l'âge moyen était de 51 ans. Ces patients étaient nombreux à présenter des comorbidités de nature médicale substantielles (42 %) et une obésité morbide (15 %). La majorité des interventions ont été minimalement effractives (66 % laparoscopiques). La durée médiane des séjours a été de 3,3 jours et le taux de réadmission précoce (< 30 j) a été de 6 %. Six pour cent des patients ont été admis aux soins intensifs. Les taux globaux de complications et de mortalité ont été respectivement de 34 % et de 2 %. Cholécystite (31 %), appendicite (21 %), obstruction intestinale (18 %), hernie incarcérée (12 %), hémorragie digestive (7 %) et infections des tissus mous (7 %) comptent parmi les diagnostics les plus fréquents. Les taux de morbidité et de mortalité dans les cas de chirurgies ouvertes ont été respectivement de 73 % et 5 %. Conclusion: Les interventions de CSA/CGSU non liées à la traumatologie sont associées à un taux de morbidité postopératoire élevé. Cette étude fournira un ensemble de valeurs de références pour l'étude prospective des complications chez les patients pris en charge par les services de CSA/CGSU et l'amélioration subséquente des soins partout au Canada.

Low-value clinical practices in injury care: A scoping review and expert consultation survey.

BACKGROUND: Tests and treatments that are not supported by evidence and could expose patients to unnecessary harm, referred to here as low-value clinical practices, consume up to 30% of health care resources. Choosing Wisely and other organizations have published lists of clinical practices to be avoided. However, few apply to injury and most are based uniquely on expert consensus. We aimed to identify low-value clinical practices in acute injury care. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review targeting articles, reviews and guidelines that identified low-value clinical practices specific to injury populations. Thirty-six experts rated clinical practices on a five-point Likert scale from clearly low value to clearly beneficial. Clinical practices reported as low value by at least one level I, II, or III study and considered clearly or potentially low-value by at least 75% of experts were retained as candidates for low-value injury care. RESULTS: Of 50,695 citations, 815 studies were included and led to the identification of 150 clinical practices. Of these, 63 were considered candidates for low-value injury care; 33 in the emergency room, 9 in trauma surgery, 15 in the intensive care unit, and 5 in orthopedics. We also identified 87 "gray zone" practices, which did not meet our criteria for low-value care. CONCLUSION: We identified 63 low-value clinical practices in acute injury care that are supported by empirical evidence and expert opinion. Conditional on future research, they represent potential targets for guidelines, overuse metrics and de-implementation interventions. We also identified 87 "gray zone" practices, which may be interesting targets for value-based decision-making. Our study represents an important step toward the deimplementation of low-value clinical practices in injury care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review, Level IV.

Efficacy of a Novel Surgical Manikin for Simulating Emergency Surgical Procedures.

The practical component of the Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS®) course typically includes a TraumaMan® manikin. This manikin is expensive; hence, a low-cost alternative (SurgeMan®) was developed in Brazil. Our primary objective was to compare user satisfaction among SurgeMan, TraumaMan, and porcine models during the course. Our secondary objective was to determine the user satisfaction scores for SurgeMan. This study included 36 ATLS students and nine instructors (4:1 ratio). Tube thoracostomy, cricothyroidotomy, pericardiocentesis, and diagnostic peritoneal lavage were performed on all the three models. The participants then rated their satisfaction both after each activity and after the course. The porcine and TraumaMan models fared better than SurgeMan for all skills except pericardiocentesis. In the absence of ethical or financial constraints, 58 per cent of the students and 66 per cent of the instructors indicated preference for the porcine model. When ethical and financial factors were considered, no preference was evident among the students, whereas 66 per cent of instructors preferred SurgeMan over the others. The students gave all three models an overall adequacy rating of >80 per cent; the instructors gave only the animal models an adequacy rating of <80 per cent. Although the users were more satisfied with TraumaMan than with SurgeMan, both were considered acceptable for the ATLS course.

Impact of Trauma System Structure on Injury Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of trauma systems in decreasing injury mortality and morbidity has been well demonstrated. However, little is known about which components contribute to their effectiveness. We aimed to systematically review the evidence of the impact of trauma system components on clinically important injury outcomes. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and BIOSIS/Web of Knowledge, gray literature and trauma association Web sites to identify studies evaluating the association between at least one trauma system component and injury outcome. We calculated pooled effect estimates using inverse-variance random-effects models. We evaluated quality of evidence using GRADE criteria. RESULTS: We screened 15,974 records, retaining 41 studies for qualitative synthesis and 19 for meta-analysis. Two recommended trauma system components were associated with reduced odds of mortality: inclusive design (odds ratio [OR] = 0.72 [0.65-0.80]) and helicopter transport (OR = 0.70 [0.55-0.88]). Pre-Hospital Advanced Trauma Life Support was associated with a significant reduction in hospital days (mean difference [MD] = 5.7 [4.4-7.0]) but a nonsignificant reduction in mortality (OR = 0.78 [0.44-1.39]). Population density of surgeons was associated with a nonsignificant decrease in mortality (MD = 0.58 [-0.22 to 1.39]). Trauma system maturity was associated with a significant reduction in mortality (OR = 0.76 [0.68-0.85]). Quality of evidence was low or very low for mortality and healthcare utilization. CONCLUSIONS: This review offers low-quality evidence for the effectiveness of an inclusive design and trauma system maturity and very-low-quality evidence for helicopter transport in reducing injury mortality. Further research should evaluate other recommended components of trauma systems and non-fatal outcomes and explore the impact of system component interactions.

Hospital and Intensive Care Unit Length of Stay for Injury Admissions: A Pan-Canadian Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the variation in hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) for injury admissions across Canadian provinces and to evaluate the relative contribution of patient case mix and treatment-related factors (intensity of care, complications, and discharge delays) to explaining observed variations. BACKGROUND: Identifying unjustified interprovider variations in resource use and the determinants of such variations is an important step towards optimizing health care. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study on admissions for major trauma (injury severity score >12) to level I and II trauma centers across Canada (2006-2012). We used data from the Canadian National Trauma Registry linked to hospital discharge data to compare risk-adjusted hospital and ICU LOS across provinces. RESULTS: Risk-adjusted hospital LOS was shortest in Ontario (10.0 days) and longest in Newfoundland and Labrador (16.1 days; P < 0.001). Risk-adjusted ICU LOS was shortest in Québec (4.4 days) and longest in Alberta (6.1 days; P < 0.001). Patient case-mix explained 32% and 8% of interhospital variations in hospital and ICU LOS, respectively, whereas treatment-related factors explained 63% and 22%. CONCLUSIONS: We observed significant variation in risk-adjusted hospital and ICU LOS across trauma systems in Canada. Provider ranks on hospital LOS were not related to those observed for ICU LOS. Treatment-related factors explained more interhospital variation in LOS than patient case-mix. Results suggest that interventions targeting reductions in low-value procedures, prevention of adverse events, and better discharge planning may be most effective for optimizing LOS for injury admissions.

Canadian benchmarks for acute injury care.

BACKGROUND: Acute care injury outcomes vary substantially across Canadian provinces and trauma centres. Our aim was to develop Canadian benchmarks to monitor mortality and hospital length of stay (LOS) for injury admissions. METHODS: Benchmarks were derived using data from the Canadian National Trauma Registry on patients with major trauma admitted to any level I or II trauma centre in Canada and from the following patient subgroups: isolated traumatic brain injury (TBI), isolated thoracoabdominal injury, multisystem blunt injury, age 65 years or older. We assessed predictive validity using measures of discrimination and calibration, and performed sensitivity analyses to assess the impact of replacing analytically complex methods (multiple imputation, shrinkage estimates and flexible modelling) with simple models that can be implemented locally. RESULTS: The mortality risk adjustment model had excellent discrimination and calibration (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.886, Hosmer-Lemeshow 36). The LOS risk-adjustment model predicted 29% of the variation in LOS. Overall, observed:expected ratios of mortality and mean LOS generated by an analytically simple model correlated strongly with those generated by analytically complex models (r > 0.95, κ on outliers > 0.90). CONCLUSION: We propose Canadian benchmarks that can be used to monitor quality of care in Canadian trauma centres using Excel (see the appendices, available at canjsurg.ca). The program can be implemented using local trauma registries, providing that at least 100 patients are available for analysis.

CONTEXTE: L'issue des traitements dispensés dans les services de traumatologie d'urgence varie substantiellement d'une province canadienne et d'un centre de traumatologie à l'autre. Notre but était d'établir des valeurs de référence pour suivre la mortalité et la durée des séjours hospitaliers en traumatologie au Canada. MÉTHODES: Les paramètres ont été sélectionnés à partir des données du Registre national des traumatismes concernant les grands polytraumatisés admis dans tout centre de traumatologie de niveau I ou II au Canada et selon les catégories de patients suivantes : traumatisme crânien isolé (TCI), traumatisme thoraco-abdominal isolé, traumatisme plurisystémique fermé, âge de 65 ans ou plus. Nous avons évalué la validité prédictive à l'aide de critères discriminants et de paramètres d'étalonnage et nous avons procédé à des analyses de sensibilité pour évaluer l'impact du remplacement de méthodes analytiques complexes (imputation multiple, estimations par contraction des coefficients et modélisation flexible) par des modèles simples applicables à l'échelle locale. RÉSULTATS: Le modèle d'ajustement du risque de mortalité s'est révélé doté d'un pouvoir discriminant et d'un étalonnage excellents (aire sous la courbe de la fonction d'efficacité du récepteur [ROC] 0,886, test de Hosmer-Lemeshow 36). Le modèle d'ajustement du risque pour la durée du séjour hospitalier a permis de prédire 29 % de sa variation. De plus, les rapports observés:attendus pour la mortalité et la durée moyenne des séjours hospitaliers générés par un modèle analytique simple ont été en étroite corrélation avec les rapports générés par les modèles analytiques complexes (r > 0,95, κ pour valeurs aberrantes > 0,90). CONCLUSION: Nous proposons des valeurs de référence canadiennes qui peuvent être utilisées pour faire le suivi de la qualité des soins dans les centres de traumatologie canadiens à l'aide d'un simple programme Excel (voir les annexes, accessible à l'adresse canjsurg.ca). Le programme peut être appliqué à l'aide des données des registres de traumatologie locaux à la condition qu'au moins 100 patients y soient accessibles pour analyse.

Trends in Injury Outcomes Across Canadian Trauma Systems.

Importance: In response to the burden of injury, the structure of injury care has changed considerably across Canada in the past decade. However, little is known about how patient outcomes have evolved. Objective: To evaluate trends in mortality, hospital length of stay, and unplanned readmission in Canadian trauma systems between 2006 and 2012. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pan-Canadian retrospective cohort study was conducted among adults admitted for major injury to a Canadian level I or II trauma center between April 1, 2006, and March 31, 2012. Data analysis was conducted from April 15 to December 3, 2015. Exposures: Trauma centers and systems. Main Outcomes and Measures: Multilevel generalized linear models were used to evaluate trends in the risk-adjusted incidence of mortality and readmission and risk-adjusted mean length of stay. Trend analyses were conducted globally and by province. Results: Among 78 807 patients (mean [SD] age, 50.7 [22.0] years; 22 540 women and 56 267 men) admitted for major injury during the study period, risk-adjusted mortality decreased from 12.1% (95% CI, 9%-16.1%) to 9.9% (95% CI, 7.4%-13.3%; P < .001) and mean length of hospital stay decreased from 11.6 (95% CI, 9.9-13.6) to 10.6 (95% CI, 9.1-12.5) days (P < .001). Statistically significant reductions in mortality were observed for Ontario (12% [95% CI, 10.7%-13.6%] to 8% [95% CI, 6.9%-9.2%]; P < .001), Alberta (12% [95% CI, 10%-14.3%] to 9.1% [95% CI, 7.7%-10.8%]; P = .02), and Manitoba (13% [95% CI, 9.1%-18.4%] to 11.1% [95% CI, 8.3%-14.7%]; P = .04). Risk-adjusted hospital stay decreased significantly in Québec (11.6 [95% CI, 11.1-12] to 9.1 [95% CI, 8.9-9.5] days; P < .001), British Columbia (12.5 [95% CI, 12-13.1] to 11.4 [10.9-11.9] days; P < .001), and Ontario (10.1 [95% CI, 9.8-10.4] to 9.8 [95% CI, 9.5-10.1] days; P < .001). No change in the incidence of readmission was observed. Conclusions and Relevance: We observed an 18.2% relative decrease in risk-adjusted mortality in Canadian trauma centers during the study period, representing 248 additional lives saved in 2012 vs 2006. Risk-adjusted mean hospital stay decreased by 8.6%, representing nearly 10 000 hospital days saved. A better understanding of the structures and processes behind observed improvements is needed to further reduce the burden of injury in Canada.

Development and Validation of Quality Criteria for Providing Patient- and Family-centered Injury Care.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the content validity of quality criteria for providing patient- and family-centered injury care. BACKGROUND: Quality criteria have been developed for clinical injury care, but not patient- and family-centered injury care. METHODS: Using a modified Research AND Development Corporation (RAND)/University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Methodology, a panel of 16 patients, family members, injury and quality of care experts serially rated and revised criteria for patient- and family-centered injury care identified from patient and family focus groups. The criteria were then sent to 384 verified trauma centers in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand for evaluation. RESULTS: A total of 46 criteria were rated and revised by the panel over 4 rounds of review producing 14 criteria related to clinical care (n = 4; transitions of care, pain management, patient safety, provider competence), communication (n = 3; information for patients/families; communication of discharge plans to patients/families, communication between hospital and community providers), holistic care (n = 4; patient hygiene, kindness and respect, family access to patient, social and spiritual support) and end-of-life care (n = 3; decision making, end-of-life care, family follow-up). Medical directors, managers, or coordinators representing 254 trauma centers (66% response rate) rated 12 criteria to be important (95% of responses) for patient- and family-centered injury care. Fewer centers rated family access to the patient (80%) and family follow-up after patient death (65%) to be important criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Fourteen-candidate quality criteria for patient- and family-centered injury care were developed and shown to have content validity. These may be used to guide quality improvement practices.

Mortality in Canadian Trauma Systems: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the variation in trauma center mortality across Canadian trauma systems, assess the contribution of traumatic brain injury and thoracoabdominal injury to observed variations, and evaluate whether the presence of recommended trauma system components is associated with mortality. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Injuries represent one of the leading causes of mortality, disability, and health care costs worldwide. Trauma systems have improved injury outcomes, but the impact of trauma system configuration on mortality is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults admitted for major injury to trauma centers across Canada (2006-2012). Multilevel logistic regression was used to estimate risk-adjusted hospital mortality and assess the impact of 13 recommended trauma system components. RESULTS: Of 78,807 patients, 8382 (10.6%) died in hospital including 6516 (78%) after severe traumatic brain injury and 749 (9%) after severe thoracoabdominal injury. Risk-adjusted mortality varied from 7.0% to 14.2% across provinces (P < 0.0001); 11.1% to 26.0% for severe traumatic brain injury (P < 0.0001), and 4.7% to 5.9% for thoracoabdominal injury (P = 0.2). Mortality decreased with increasing number of recommended trauma system elements; adjusted odds ratio = 0.93 (0.87-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: We observed significant variation in trauma center mortality across Canadian provinces, specifically for severe traumatic brain injury. Provinces with more recommended trauma system components had better patient survival. Results suggest that trauma system configuration may be an important determinant of injury mortality. A better understanding of which system processes drive optimal outcomes is required to reduce the burden of injury worldwide.

Assessment of technical and nontechnical skills in surgical residents.

BACKGROUND: Surgical competence encompasses both technical and nontechnical skills. This study seeks to evaluate the validity evidence for a comprehensive surgical skills examination and to examine the relationship between technical and nontechnical skills. METHODS: Six examination stations assessing both technical and nontechnical skills, conducted yearly for surgical trainees (n = 120) between 2010 and 2014 are included. RESULTS: The assessment tools demonstrated acceptable internal consistency. Interstation reliability for technical skills was low (alpha = .39). Interstation reliability for the nontechnical skills was lower (alpha range -.05 to .31). Nontechnical skills domains were strongly correlated, ranging from r = .65, P < .001 to .86, P < .001. The associations between nontechnical and technical skills were inconsistent, ranging from poor (r = -.06; P = .54) to moderate (r = .45; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple samplings of integrated technical and nontechnical skills are necessary to assess overall surgical competency.

Derivation and Validation of a Quality Indicator to Benchmark In-Hospital Complications Among Injury Admissions.

IMPORTANCE: The rate of complications among injury admissions has been estimated to be more than 3 times that observed for general admissions, and complications have been targeted as an important quality-of-care metric. Despite the negative effect of complications on resource use and patient mortality and morbidity, there is no standardized method to benchmark trauma centers in terms of in-hospital complications, to our knowledge. OBJECTIVES: To develop a quality indicator (QI) for in-hospital complications that can be used to evaluate the quality of acute injury care and to assess its validity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter retrospective cohort study. The setting was a well-established inclusive trauma system in Canada. Participants included all 66 048 moderate or major injury admissions to an adult trauma center between April 1, 2006, and March 31, 2012. The dates of the analysis were January to April 2015. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the occurrence of at least 1 in-hospital complication. We selected risk-adjustment variables by expert consultation and bootstrap resampling. We evaluated internal validity using measures of discrimination, construct validity, and forecasting. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 66 048 patients. Their mean (SD) age was 59 (22) years, and 48.0% were female. Fifteen percent of patients had at least 1 in-hospital complication. The risk-adjustment model has excellent discrimination (area under the curve, 0.81) and calibration. The QI was correlated with the risk-adjusted incidence of mortality (r = 0.71), unplanned readmission (r = 0.43), and mean length of stay (r = 0.68). Hospital performance on the QI from 2007 to 2009 was predictive of performance from 2010 to 2012 (r = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We developed a QI to benchmark trauma centers on in-hospital complications among injury admissions. The QI is based on data that are routinely collected in most trauma systems and demonstrates good internal validity. The integration of this QI in trauma quality improvement programs will facilitate the identification of quality problems, the implementation of solutions, and the evaluation of their effectiveness. Therefore, the QI has the potential to lead to reductions in mortality, morbidity, and resource use after injury.

Multicenter validation of the Quality of Trauma Care Patient-Reported Experience Measure (QTAC-PREM).

BACKGROUND: Incorporating patient and family perspectives into injury care quality assessment is a necessary part of comprehensive quality improvement. However, tools to measure patient and family perspectives of injury care are lacking. Therefore, our objective was to assess the psychometric properties of the Quality of Trauma Care Patient-Reported Experience Measure (QTAC-PREM), the first measure developed to assess patient experiences with overall injury care. METHODS: We conducted a prospective multicenter cohort study of adult injury patients recruited from three trauma centers. Patients or surrogates completed an acute care survey measure in the hospital and a post-acute care survey measure after hospital discharge. RESULTS: Four hundred participants (78%) completed the acute care measure, and 207 (59%) completed the post-acute care measure. We identified three subscales on the acute measure and two subscales on the post-acute measure. All subscales and items had evidence of construct validity. Four subscales had good internal consistency, and three were independent predictors of participants' overall ratings of injury care quality. The majority of items demonstrated suitable test-retest reliability. Comparison of QTAC-PREM scores with those of an existing patient experience tool, the Hospital version of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS), demonstrated evidence of appropriate divergent and convergent validity. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the QTAC-PREM is feasible to implement at trauma centers and provides evidence of validity and reliability. The tool may be useful to incorporate patient perspectives into trauma care quality measurement and improvement.

Clinical Presentation of Patients With Tension Pneumothorax: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the reported clinical presentation of tension pneumothorax differs between patients who are breathing unassisted versus receiving assisted ventilation. BACKGROUND: Animal studies suggest that the pathophysiology and physical signs of tension pneumothorax differ by subject ventilatory status. METHODS: We searched electronic databases through to October 15, 2013 for observational studies and case reports/series reporting clinical manifestations of tension pneumothorax. Two physicians independently extracted clinical manifestations reported at diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified 5 cohort studies (n = 310 patients) and 156 case series/reports of 183 cases of tension pneumothorax (n = 86 breathing unassisted, n = 97 receiving assisted ventilation). Hypoxia was reported among 43 (50.0%) cases of tension pneumothorax who were breathing unassisted versus 89 (91.8%) receiving assisted ventilation (P < 0.001). Pulmonary dysfunction progressed to respiratory arrest in 9.3% of cases breathing unassisted. As compared to cases who were breathing unassisted, the adjusted odds of hypotension and cardiac arrest were 12.6 (95% confidence interval, 5.8-27.5) and 17.7 (95% confidence interval, 4.0-78.4) times higher among cases receiving assisted ventilation. One cohort study reported that none of the patients with tension pneumothorax who were breathing unassisted versus 39.6% of those receiving assisted ventilation presented without an arterial pulse. In contrast to cases breathing unassisted, the majority (70.4%) of those receiving assisted ventilation who experienced hypotension or cardiac arrest developed these signs within minutes of clinical presentation. DISCUSSION: The reported clinical presentation of tension pneumothorax depends on the ventilatory status of the patient. This may have implications for improving the diagnosis and treatment of this life-threatening disorder.