Feasibility and Acceptance of a Teletrauma Surgery Consult Service to Rural and Community Hospitals: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Many trauma patients currently transferred from rural and community hospitals (RCH) to Level I trauma centers (LITC) for trauma surgery evaluation may instead be appropriate for immediate discharge or admission to the local facility after evaluation by a trauma and acute care surgery (TACS) surgeon. Unnecessary use of resources occurs with current practice. We aimed to demonstrate the feasibility and acceptance of a teletrauma surgery consultation service between LITC and RCH. STUDY DESIGN: LITC TACS surgeons provided telehealth consults on trauma patients from 3 local RCHs. After consultation, appropriate patients were transferred to LITC; selected patients remained at or were discharged from RCH. Participating TACS surgeons and RCH physicians were surveyed. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients met inclusion criteria during the 5-month pilot phase, with 7 excluded due to workflow issues. The mean ± SD age was 63 ± 17 years. Of 21 patients, 7 had intracranial hemorrhage; 12 had rib fractures. The mean ± SD Injury Severity Score was 8.1 ± 4.0). A total of 6 patients were discharged from RCH, 4 admitted to RCH hospitalist service, 2 transferred to a LITC emergency room, and 9 transferred to LITC as direct admission. There was one 30-day readmission and no missed injuries or complications, or deaths. RCH providers were highly satisfied with the teletrauma surgery consultation service, TACS surgeons, and equipment used. Mental demand and effort of consulting TACS surgeons decreased significantly as the consult number increased. CONCLUSIONS: Teletrauma surgery consultation involving 3 RCH within our system is feasible and acceptable. A total of 10 transfers and 19 emergency department visits were avoided. There was favorable acceptance by RCH providers and TACS surgeons.

Surviving traumatic cardiac arrest: Identification of factors associated with survival.

INTRODUCTION: The endpoint of resuscitative interventions after traumatic injury resulting in cardiopulmonary arrest varies across institutions and even among providers. The purpose of this study was to examine survival characteristics in patients suffering torso trauma with no recorded vital signs (VS) in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank was analyzed from 2007 to 2015. Inclusion criteria were patients with blunt and penetrating torso trauma without VS in the ED. Patients with head injuries, transfers from other hospitals, or those with missing values were excluded. The characteristics of survivors were evaluated, and statistical analyses performed. RESULTS: A total of 24,191 torso trauma patients without VS were evaluated in the ED and 96.6% were declared dead upon arrival. There were 246 survivors (1%), and 73 (0.3%) were eventually discharged home. Of patients who responded to resuscitation (812), the survival rate was 30.3%. Injury severity score (ISS), penetrating mechanism (odds ratio [OR] 1.99), definitive chest (OR 1.59) and abdominal surgery (OR 1.49) were associated with improved survival. Discharge to home (or police custody) was associated with lower ISS (OR 0.975) and shorter ED time (OR 0.99). CONCLUSION: Over a recent nine-year period in the United States, nearly 25,000 trauma patients were treated at trauma centers despite lack of VS. Of these patients, only 73 were discharged home. A trauma center would have to attempt over one hundred resuscitations of traumatic arrests to save one patient, confirming previous reports that highlight a grave prognosis. This creates a dilemma in treatment for front line workers and physicians with resource utilization and consideration of safety of exposure, particularly in the face of COVID-19.