Structured approach with primary and secondary survey for major trauma care: an overview of reviews.

BACKGROUND: A structured approach involves systematic management of trauma patients. We aim to conduct an overview of reviews about the clinical efficacy and safety of structured approach (i.e., primary and secondary survey) by guideline checklist compared to non-structured approach (i.e. clinical examination); moreover, routine screening whole-body computer tomography (WBCT) was compared to non-routine WBCT in patients with suspected major trauma. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews up to 3 May 2022. Systematic reviews (SRs) that investigated the use of a structured approach compared to a non-structured approach were eligible. Two authors independently extracted data, managed the overlapping of primary studies belonging to the included SRs and calculated the corrected covered area (CCA). The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. RESULTS: We included nine SRs investigating two comparisons in stable trauma patients: structured approach vs non-structured approach (n = 1) and routine WBCT vs non-routine WBCT (n = 8). The overlap of included primary studies was generally high across outcomes (CCA ranged between 20.85 and 42.86%) with some discrepancies in the directions of effects across reviews. The application of a structured approach by checklist may improve adherence to guidelines (e.g. Advanced Trauma Life Support) during resuscitation and might lead to a reduction in mortality among severely injured patients as compared to clinical examination (Adjusted OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.30-0.89; p = 0.018; low certainty of evidence). The use of routine WBCT seems to offer little to no effects in reducing mortality and time spent in emergency room or department, whereas non-routine WBCT seems to offer little to no effects in reducing radiation dose, intensive care unit length of stay (LOS) and hospital LOS (low-to-moderate certainty of evidence). CONCLUSIONS: The application of structured approach by checklist during trauma resuscitation may improve patient- and process-related outcomes. Including non-routine WBCT seems to offer the best trade-offs between benefits and harm. Clinicians should consider these findings in the light of their clinical context, the volume of patients in their facilities, the need for time management, and costs.

COVID-19 mortality among migrants living in Italy.

We aimed to compare COVID-19-specific and all-cause mortality rates among natives and migrants in Italy and to investigate the clinical characteristics of individuals dying with COVID-19 by native/migrant status. The mortality rates and detailed clinical characteristics of natives and migrants dying with COVID-19 were explored by considering the medical charts of a representative sample of patients deceased in Italian hospitals (n = 2,687) between February 21st and April 29th, 2020. The migrant or native status was assigned based on the individual's country of birth. The expected all-cause mortality among natives and migrants living in Italy was derived by the last available (2018) dataset provided by the Italian National Institute of Statistics. Overall, 68 individuals with a migration background were identified. The proportions of natives and migrants among the COVID-19-related deaths (97.5% and 2.5%, respectively) were similar to the relative all-cause mortality rates estimated in Italy in 2018 (97.4% and 2.6%, respectively). The clinical phenotype of migrants dying with COVID-19 was similar to that of natives except for the younger age at death. International migrants living in Italy do not have a mortality advantage for COVID-19 and are exposed to the risk of poor outcomes as their native counterparts.