The use of routine laboratory testing in acute trauma care: A retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: In more than 60 countries worldwide, laboratory testing plays a challenging and expensive role in trauma resus-citation. In 1995, the literature already suggested that routine laboratory testing may not be useful for most trauma patients. Our study hypothesized that still the need for some laboratory tests perhaps should be reconsidered. Therefore, the aim of this study was to create more insight in the distribution between normal and abnormal parameters for routine laboratory testing in trauma patient management. METHODS: This retrospective analysis was performed at Amsterdam UMC, location AMC, an academic level 1 trauma center. Data concerning age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical state classification system (ASA), Injury Severity Scores, Glasgow Coma Scales, mechanism of injury, presence of high-energy trauma, and type of injury (blunt or penetrating) were obtained. Laboratory parameters included comprehensive hematology, coagulation, arterial blood gas, kidney, and liver blood panels. Analytical focus was paid to the patient's vital status, the indication for an emergency intervention, and the risk of in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1287 patients were included in the study. Patients with unstable vital signs or who required emergency inter-vention were most often dealing with abnormalities in pO2, glucose, D-dimer, creatinine, and alcohol values. Mean corpuscular volume (MCV), international normalized ratio (INR), fibrinogen, and amylase were obtained in more than 80% of the patients, but in specific patient groups only abnormal in less than 9%. CONCLUSION: Trauma patients suffer mainly from abnormal values of D-dimer, pO2, glucose, creatinine, and alcohol. By contrast, MCV, INR, amylase, fibrinogen, and thrombocytes are regularly obtained as well, but only abnormal in a small amount of trauma patients. These findings suggest reconsiderations and more accuracy in the performance of laboratory testing, especially for trauma patients with stable vital signs.

The effect of socioeconomic status on severe traumatic injury: a statistical analysis.

PURPOSE: The amount of studies performed regarding a link between socioeconomic status (SES) and fatal outcome after traumatic injury is limited. Most research is focused on work-related injuries without taking other important characteristics into account. The aim of this study is to examine the association between SES and outcome after traumatic injury. METHODS: The study involved polytrauma patients [Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 16] admitted to the Amsterdam University Medical Center (location VUmc) and Northwest Clinics Alkmaar (level 1 trauma centers). The SES of every patient was based on their postal code and represented with a "status score". Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to estimate the association between SES and mortality, length of stay at the hospital and length of stay at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Z-statistics were used to determine the difference between the expected and actual survival, based on Trauma Revised Injury Severity Score (TRISS) and PSNL15 (probability of survival based on the Dutch population). RESULTS: A total of 967 patients were included in this study. The lowest SES group was significantly associated with more penetrating injuries and a younger age (45 years versus 55 years). Additionally, severely injured patients with lower SES were noted to have a prolonged stay at the ICU. Furthermore, differences were found in the expected and observed survival, especially for the lower SES groups. CONCLUSION: Polytrauma patients with lower SES have more often penetrating injuries, are younger and have a longer stay at the ICU. No association was found between SES and length of hospital stay and neither between SES and mortality.