Patient and Hospital Characteristics Associated with Admission Among Patients With Minor Isolated Extremity Firearm Injuries: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

Objective: To quantify the association between insurance and hospital admission following minor isolated extremity firearm injury. Background: The association between insurance and injury admission has not been examined. Methods: This was an observational retrospective cohort study of minor isolated extremity firearm injury captured in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient and Emergency Department Databases in 6 states (New York, Arkansas, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Florida, and Maryland) from 2016 to 2017 among patients aged 16 years or older. The primary exposure was insurance. Admitted patients were propensity score matched to nonadmitted patients on age, extremity Abbreviated Injury Score, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index with exact matching within hospital to adjust for selection bias. A general estimating equation logistic regression estimated the association between insurance and odds of admission in the matched cohort while controlling for sex, race, injury intent, injury type, hospital profit type, and trauma center designation with observations clustered by propensity score-matched pairs within hospital. Results: A total of 8151 patients presented to hospital with a minor isolated extremity firearm injury between 2016 and 2017 in 6 states. Patients were 88.0% male, 56.6% Black, and 71.7% aged 16 to 36 years old, and 22.1% were admitted. A total of 2090 patients were matched on propensity for admission. Privately insured matched patients had 1.70 higher adjusted odds of admission and 95% confidence interval of 1.30 to 2.22, compared with uninsured after adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. Conclusions: Insurance was associated with hospital admission for minor isolated extremity firearm injury.

A multidimensional approach to identifying high-performing trauma centers across the United States.

INTRODUCTION: The differentiators of centers performing at the highest level of quality and patient safety are likely both structural and cultural. We aimed to combine five indicators representing established domains of trauma quality and to identify and describe the structural characteristics of consistently performing centers. METHODS: Using American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program data from 2017 to 2020, we evaluated five quality measures across several care domains for adult patients in levels I and II trauma centers: (1) time to operating room for patients with abdominal gunshot wounds and shock, (2) proportion of patients receiving timely venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, (3) failure to rescue (death following a complication), (4) major hospital complications, and (5) mortality. Overall performance was summarized as a composite score incorporating all measures. Centers were ranked from highest to lowest performer. Principal component analysis showed the influence of each indicator on overall performance and supported the composite score approach. RESULTS: We identified 272 levels I and II centers, with 28 and 27 centers in the top and bottom 10%, respectively. Patients treated in high-performing centers had significant lower rates of death major complications and failure to rescue, compared with low-performing centers ( p < 0.001). The median time to operating room for gunshot wound was almost half that in high compared with low-performing centers, and rates of timely venous thromboembolism prophylaxis were over twofold greater ( p < 0.001). Top performing centers were more likely to be level I centers and cared for a higher number of severely injured patients per annum. Each indicator contributed meaningfully to the variation in scores and centers tended to perform consistently across most indicators. CONCLUSION: The combination of multiple indicators across dimensions of quality sets a higher standard for performance evaluation and allows the discrimination of centers based on structural elements, specifically level 1 status, and trauma center volume. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic /Care Management; Level IV.

Morbidity and Length of Stay After Injury Among People Experiencing Homelessness in North America.

Importance: Traumatic injury is a leading cause of hospitalization among people experiencing homelessness. However, hospital course among this population is unknown. Objective: To evaluate whether homelessness was associated with increased morbidity and length of stay (LOS) after hospitalization for traumatic injury and whether associations between homelessness and LOS were moderated by age and/or Injury Severity Score (ISS). Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Programs (TQP) included patients 18 years or older who were hospitalized after an injury and discharged alive from 787 hospitals in North America from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018. People experiencing homelessness were propensity matched to housed patients for hospital, sex, insurance type, comorbidity, injury mechanism type, injury body region, and Glasgow Coma Scale score. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2022, to May 31, 2023. Exposures: People experiencing homelessness were identified using the TQP's alternate home residence variable. Main Outcomes and Measures: Morbidity, hemorrhage control surgery, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission were assessed. Associations between homelessness and LOS (in days) were tested with hierarchical multivariable negative bionomial regression. Moderation effects of age and ISS on the association between homelessness and LOS were evaluated with interaction terms. Results: Of 1 441 982 patients (mean [SD] age, 55.1 [21.1] years; (822 491 [57.0%] men, 619 337 [43.0%] women, and 154 [0.01%] missing), 9065 (0.6%) were people experiencing homelessness. Unmatched people experiencing homelessness demonstrated higher rates of morbidity (221 [2.4%] vs 25 134 [1.8%]; P < .001), hemorrhage control surgery (289 [3.2%] vs 20 331 [1.4%]; P < .001), and ICU admission (2353 [26.0%] vs 307 714 [21.5%]; P < .001) compared with housed patients. The matched cohort comprised 8665 pairs at 378 hospitals. Differences in rates of morbidity, hemorrhage control surgery, and ICU admission between people experiencing homelessness and matched housed patients were not statistically significant. The median unadjusted LOS was 5 (IQR, 3-10) days among people experiencing homelessness and 4 (IQR, 2-8) days among matched housed patients (P < .001). People experiencing homelessness experienced a 22.1% longer adjusted LOS (incident rate ratio [IRR], 1.22 [95% CI, 1.19-1.25]). The greatest increase in adjusted LOS was observed among people experiencing homelessness who were 65 years or older (IRR, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.32-1.54]). People experiencing homelessness with minor injury (ISS, 1-8) had the greatest relative increase in adjusted LOS (IRR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.25-1.35]) compared with people experiencing homelessness with severe injury (ISS ≥16; IRR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.09-1.20]). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that challenges in providing safe discharge to people experiencing homelessness after injury may lead to prolonged LOS. These findings underscore the need to reduce disparities in trauma outcomes and improve hospital resource use among people experiencing homelessness.

Pediatric Surgery Firearm Injury Collaborative Symposium.

Injury from a firearm is now the leading cause of death of children and youth under age 19 in the United States (U.S.) [1] and the incidence of these deaths continues to increase each year [2]. For every death from firearm violence, there are several young people who have been injured by a bullet but not killed. As pediatric surgeons, we are on the front lines of treating these young patients. We have the unforgettable memories of delivering the horrible news to parents in "quiet rooms." [3]. As these injuries fall within our scope of practice, it is incumbent on us as professionals to work to prevent these injuries, apply best practices and work for the best pathways to recovery for our patients who do survive. There is a diverse community of pediatric surgeons tackling this public health problem in a variety of ways [4]. In a pre-meeting symposium at the APSA 2023 Annual meeting, we brought together a community of pediatric surgeons working on this critical area. The following summarizes the presentations of the symposium, with topics including Risk Factors, Injury Prevention, Treatment, Public Initiatives, and National Collaborative Efforts. TYPE OF STUDY: Review Article, Proceedings of a Symposium. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 through 4 all presented.

The gap between hospital-based violence intervention services and client needs: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Survivors of intentional interpersonal violence face social challenges related to social determinants of health that led to their initial injury. Hospital-based violence intervention programs reduce reinjury. It is unclear how well they meet clients' reported needs. This systematic review aimed to quantify how well hospital-based violence intervention program services addressed clients' reported needs. METHODS: Medline, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, and PsycInfo were queried for studies addressing hospital-based violence intervention programs services and intentional injury survivors' needs in the United States. Case reports, reviews, editorials, theses, and studies focusing on pediatric patients, victims of intimate partner violence, or sexual assault were excluded. Data extracted included program structure, hospital-based violence intervention program services, and client needs assessments before and after receiving hospital-based violence intervention program services. RESULTS: Of the 3,339 citations identified, 13 articles were selected for inclusion. Hospital-based violence intervention programs clients' most reported needs included mental health (10 studies), employment (7), and education (5) before receiving hospital-based violence intervention programs services. Only 4 studies conducted quantitative client needs assessments before and after receiving hospital-based violence intervention program services. All 4 studies were able to meet at least 50% of each of the clients' reported needs. The success rate depended on the need and program location: success in meeting mental health needs ranged from 65% to 90% of clients. Conversely, time-intensive long-term needs were least met, including employment 60% to 86% of clients, education 47% to 73%, and housing 50% to 71%. CONCLUSION: Few hospital-based violence intervention programs studies considered clients' reported needs. Employment, education, and housing must be a stronger focus of hospital-based violence intervention programs.

Hospital variability in adoption of alcohol and drug screening in adult trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Despite recommendations to screen all injured patients for substance use, single-center studies have reported underscreening. This study sought to determine if there was significant practice variability in adoption of alcohol and drug screening of injured patients among hospitals participating in the Trauma Quality Improvement Program. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational cross-sectional study of trauma patients 18 years or older in Trauma Quality Improvement Program 2017-2018. Hierarchical multivariable logistic regression modeled the odds of screening for alcohol and drugs via blood/urine test while controlling for patient and hospital variables. We identified statistically significant high and low-screening hospitals based on hospitals' estimated random intercepts and associated confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Of 1,282,111 patients at 744 hospitals, 619,423 (48.3%) were screened for alcohol, and 388,732 (30.3%) were screened for drugs. Hospital-level alcohol screening rates ranged from 0.8% to 99.7%, with a mean rate of 42.4% (SD, 25.1%). Hospital-level drug screening rates ranged from 0.2% to 99.9% (mean, 27.1%; SD, 20.2%). A total of 37.1% (95% CI, 34.7-39.6%) of variance in alcohol screening and 31.5% (95% CI, 29.2-33.9%) of variance in drug screening were at the hospital level. Level I/II trauma centers had higher adjusted odds of alcohol screening (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.22-1.41) and drug screening (aOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.08-1.25) than Level III and nontrauma centers. We found 297 low-screening and 307 high-screening hospitals in alcohol after adjusting for patient and hospital variables. There were 298 low-screening and 298 high-screening hospitals for drugs. CONCLUSION: Overall rates of recommended alcohol and drug screening of injured patients were low and varied significantly between hospitals. These results underscore an important opportunity to improve the care of injured patients and reduce rates of substance use and trauma recidivism. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Patient and Hospital Characteristics Associated With Delayed Diagnosis of Appendicitis.

Importance: Racial disparities in timely diagnosis and treatment of surgical conditions exist; however, it is poorly understood whether there are hospital structural measures or patient-level characteristics that modify this phenomenon. Objective: To assess whether patient race and ethnicity are associated with delayed appendicitis diagnosis and postoperative 30-day hospital use and whether there are patient- or systems-level factors that modify this association. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based, retrospective cohort study used data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's state inpatient and emergency department (ED) databases from 4 states (Florida, Maryland, New York, and Wisconsin) for patients aged 18 to 64 years who underwent appendectomy from January 7, 2016, to December 1, 2017. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2017. Exposure: Delayed diagnosis of appendicitis, defined as an initial ED presentation with an abdominal diagnosis other than appendicitis followed by re-presentation within a week for appendectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: A mixed-effects multivariable Poisson regression model was used to estimate the association of delayed diagnosis of appendicitis with race and ethnicity while controlling for patient and hospital variables. A second mixed-effects multivariable Poisson regression model quantified the association of delayed diagnosis of appendicitis with postoperative 30-day hospital use. Results: Of 80 312 patients who received an appendectomy during the study period (median age, 38 years [IQR, 27-50 years]; 50.8% female), 2013 (2.5%) experienced delayed diagnosis. In the entire cohort, 2.9% of patients were Asian or Pacific Islander, 18.8% were Hispanic, 10.9% were non-Hispanic Black, 60.8% were non-Hispanic White, and 6.6% were other race and ethnicity; most were privately insured (60.2%). Non-Hispanic Black patients had a 1.41 (95% CI, 1.21-1.63) times higher adjusted rate of delayed diagnosis compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Patients at hospitals with a more than 50% Black or Hispanic population had a 0.73 (95% CI, 0.59-0.91) decreased adjusted rate of delayed appendicitis diagnosis compared with hospitals with a less than 25% Black or Hispanic population. Conversely, patients at hospitals with more than 50% of discharges of Medicaid patients had a 3.51 (95% CI, 1.69-7.28) higher adjusted rate of delayed diagnosis compared with hospitals with less than 10% of discharges of Medicaid patients. Additional factors associated with delayed diagnosis included female sex, higher levels of patient comorbidity, and living in a low-income zip code. Delayed diagnosis was associated with a 1.38 (95% CI, 1.36-1.61) increased adjusted rate of postoperative 30-day hospital use. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, non-Hispanic Black patients had higher rates of delayed appendicitis diagnosis and 30-day hospital use than White patients. Patients presenting to hospitals with a greater than 50% Black and Hispanic population were less likely to experience delayed diagnosis, suggesting that seeking care at a hospital that serves a diverse patient population may help mitigate the increased rate of delayed diagnosis observed for non-Hispanic Black patients.

How does Injury Severity Score derived from International Classification of Diseases Programs for Injury Categorization using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes perform compared with Injury Severity Score derived from Trauma Quality Improvement Program?

BACKGROUND: Injury Severity Score (ISS) is a measurement of injury severity based on the Abbreviated Injury Scale. Because of the difficulty and expense of Abbreviated Injury Scale coding, there have been recent efforts in mapping ISS from administrative International Classification of Diseases ( ICD ) codes instead. Specifically, the open source and freely available International Classification of Diseases Programs for Injury Categorization (ICDPIC) in R (Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) converts International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes to ISS. This study aims to compare ICDPIC calculations versus manually derived Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) calculations for International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision ( ICD-10 ), codes. Moderate concordance was chosen as the hypothetical relationship because of previous work by both Fleischman et al. ( J Trauma Nurs. 2017;24(1):4-14) who found moderate to substantial concordance between ICDPIC and ISS and Di Bartolomeo et al. ( Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2010;18(1):17) who found none to slight concordance. Given these very different findings, we thought it reasonable to predict moderate concordance with the use of more detailed ICD-10 codes. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of 1,040,728 encounters in the TQIP registry for the year 2018. International Classification of Diseases Programs for Injury Categorization in R was used to derive ISS from the ICD-10 codes in the registry. The resulting scores were compared with the manually derived ISS in TQIP. RESULTS: The median difference between ISS calculated by ICDPIC-2021 using ICD-10, Clinical Modification (ISS-ICDPIC), and manually derived ISS was -3 (95% confidence interval, -5 to 0), while the mean difference was -2.09 (95% confidence interval, -2.10 to -2.07). There was substantial concordance between ISS-ICDPIC and manually derived ISS ( κ = 0.66). The ISS-ICDPIC was a better predictor of mortality (area under the curve, 0.853 vs. 0.836) but a worse predictor of intensive care unit admission (area under the curve, 0.741 vs. 0.757) and hospital stay ≥10 days (AUC, 0.701 vs. 0.743). The ICDPIC has substantial concordance with TQIP for the firearm ( κ = 0.69), motor vehicle trauma ( κ = 0.71), and pedestrian ( κ = 0.73) injury mechanisms. CONCLUSION: When TQIP data are unavailable, ICDPIC remains a valid way to calculate ISS after transition to ICD-10 codes. The ISS-ICDPIC performs well in predicting a number of outcomes of interest but is best served as a predictor of mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Language of violence: Do words matter more than we think?

Firearm violence is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among young adults. Identification of intervention targets is crucial to developing and implementing effective prevention efforts. Hospital Violence Intervention Programs (HVIPs) have used a multiprong social care approach to mediate the cycle of interpersonal violence. One struggle continually encountered is how to change the conversation around the future. Speech patterns have been associated with health outcomes and overall behavior modification. During violence prevention efforts, young victims of violence say things such as 'I'm living on borrowed time' and 'why should I worry about getting an education when I'll likely die soon anyway?' Such speech patterns may contribute to the cycle of violence and increase the likelihood of reinjury. Presented is a narrative review of the impact language has on health outcomes and how psychotherapy may be able to change thought patterns, alter language structure, and ultimately reduce risk of reinjury. The biopsychosocial model of health posits that a person's health is dictated by a combination of biological, psychological, and social factors. By understanding that language exists in the personal context, it can serve as both an indicator and a tool for targeted interventions. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) works by retraining thought and speech patterns to affect change in emotion, physiology, and behavior. It is proposed here that CBT could be used in the HVIPs' multidisciplinary case management model by involving trained psychotherapists. Language is an important indicator of a patient's psychological state and approach to life-changing decisions. As such, language alteration through CBT could potentially be used as a novel method of injury prevention. This concept has not before been explored in this setting and may be an effective supplement to HVIPs' success.

Sex-Based Disparities in Timeliness of Trauma Care and Discharge Disposition.

Importance: Differences in time to diagnostic and therapeutic measures can contribute to disparities in outcomes. However, whether there is an association of timeliness by sex for trauma patients is unknown. Objective: To investigate whether sex-based differences in time to definitive interventions exist for trauma patients in the US and whether these differences are associated with outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted from July 2020 to July 2021, using the 2013 to 2016 Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) databases from level I to III trauma centers in the US. Patients 18 years or older with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) greater than 15 and who carried diagnoses of traumatic brain injury, intra-abdominal injury, pelvic fracture, femur fracture, and spinal injury as a result of their trauma were included in the study. Data were analyzed from July 2020 to July 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes assessed timeliness to interventions, using Wilcoxon signed rank and χ2 tests. Secondary outcomes included location of discharge after injury, using propensity score-matched generalized estimating equations modeling. Results: Of the 28 332 patients included, 20 002 (70.6%) were male patients (mean [SD] age, 43.3 [18.2] years) and 8330 (29.4%) were female patients (mean [SD] age, 48.5 [21.1] years), with significantly different distributions of ISS scores (ISS score 16-24: male patient, 10 622 [53.1%]; female patient, 4684 [56.2%]; ISS score 41-74: male patient, 2052 [10.3%]; female patient, 852 [10.2%]). Male patients more frequently had abdominal (4257 [21.3%] vs 1268 [15.2%]) and spinal cord (3989 [20.0%] vs 1274 [15.3%]) injuries, whereas female patients experienced greater proportions of femur (3670 [44.0%] vs 8422 [42.1%]) and pelvic (3970 [47.6%] vs 6963 [34.8%]) fractures. Female patients experienced significantly longer emergency department length of stay (median [IQR], 184 [92-314] minutes vs 172 [86-289] minutes; P < .001), longer time in pretriage (median [IQR], 52 [36-80] minutes vs 49 [34-77] minutes; P < .001), and increased likelihood of discharge to nursing or long-term care facilities instead of home after matching by age, ISS, mechanism, and injury type (male patient:female patient, odds ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.67-0.78). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that female trauma patients experienced slightly longer delays in trauma care and had a higher likelihood of discharge to long-term care facilities than their male counterparts.

Time to OR for patients with abdominal gunshot wounds: A potential process measure to assess the quality of trauma care?

BACKGROUND: Abdominal gunshot wounds (GSWs) require rapid assessment and operative intervention to reduce the risk of death and complications. We sought to determine if time to the operating room (OR) might be a useful process measure for the assessment of trauma care quality. We evaluated the facility benchmark time to OR for patients with serious injury and whether this was associated with lower rates of complications and mortality. METHODS: We evaluated time to OR for adult patients with an abdominal GSW presenting in shock to American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program centers from 2015 to 2020. We calculated the 75th percentile time to the OR for each center and characterized centers as average, slow, or fast. We compared patient and facility characteristics across outlier status, as well as risk-adjusted complications and mortality using hierarchical multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: There were 4,027 patients in 230 centers that met the inclusion criteria. Mortality was 28%. There were 61 (27%) fast and 52 (23%) slow centers. The median time for slow centers was 83 minutes (68-94 minutes) compared with fast centers, 35 minutes (32-38 minutes). Injury Severity Score and emergency department vital signs were similar across centers. Fast hospitals had higher total case volumes, more cases per surgeon, and were more likely to be Level I centers. Patients cared for in these centers had similar risk-adjusted rates of complications and mortality. CONCLUSION: Time to OR for patients with abdominal GSWs and shock might be a useful process measure to evaluate rapid decision making and OR access. Surgeon and center experience as measured by annual case volumes, coupled with a rapid surgical response required through Level I trauma center standards might be contributory. There was no association between outlier status and complications or mortality suggesting other factors apart from time to the OR are of greater significance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management, Level IV.

Error reduction in trauma care: Lessons from an anonymized, national, multicenter mortality reporting system.

BACKGROUND: Twenty years ago, the landmark report To Err Is Human illustrated the importance of system-level solutions, in contrast to person-level interventions, to assure patient safety. Nevertheless, rates of preventable deaths, particularly in trauma care, have not materially changed. The American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program developed a voluntary Mortality Reporting System to better understand the underlying causes of preventable trauma deaths and the strategies used by centers to prevent future deaths. The objective of this work is to describe the factors contributing to potentially preventable deaths after injury and to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies identified by trauma centers to mitigate future harm, as reported in the Mortality Reporting System. METHODS: An anonymous structured web-based reporting template based on the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations taxonomy was made available to trauma centers participating in the Trauma Quality Improvement Program to allow for reporting of deaths that were potentially preventable. Contributing factors leading to death were evaluated. The effectiveness of mitigating strategies was assessed using a validated framework and mapped to tiers of effectiveness ranging from person-focused to system-oriented interventions. RESULTS: Over a 2-year period, 395 deaths were reviewed. Of the mortalities, 33.7% were unanticipated. Errors pertained to management (50.9%), clinical performance (54.7%), and communication (56.2%). Human failures were cited in 61% of cases. Person-focused strategies like education were common (56.0%), while more effective system-based strategies were seldom used. In 7.3% of cases, centers could not identify a specific strategy to prevent future harm. CONCLUSION: Most strategies to reduce errors in trauma centers focus on changing the performance of providers rather than system-level interventions such as automation, standardization, and fail-safe approaches. Centers require additional support to develop more effective mitigations that will prevent recurrent errors and patient harm. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management, level V.

Long-term Outcomes of Firearm Injury Survivors in the United States: The National Trauma Research Action Plan Scoping Review.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To describe the current literature regarding long-term physical, mental, and social outcomes of firearm injury survivors in the United States. METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases for articles published from 2013 to 2019 that involved survivors of acute physical traumatic injury aged 18 or older and reported health outcomes between 6 months and 10 years postinjury. Out of 747 articles identified, seven reported outcomes on United States-based civilian patients whose mechanism of injury involved firearms. We extended our publication date criteria from 1995 to 2020 and expanded the search strategy to include medical subject headings terms specific for firearm injury outcomes. Ultimately, ten articles met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: When studied, a significant proportion of patients surviving firearm injury screened positive for posttraumatic stress disorder (49%-60%) or were readmitted (13%-26%) within 6 months postinjury. Most studies reported worse long-term outcomes for firearm injury survivors when compared both to similarly injured motor vehicle collision survivors and to the United States general population, including increased chronic pain, new functional limitations, and reduced physical health composite scores. Studies also reported high rates of posttraumatic stress disorder, reduced mental health composite scores, lower employment and return to work rates, poor social functioning, increased alcohol, and substance abuse. CONCLUSIONS: Research on the long-term health impact of firearm injury is scant, and heterogeneity in available studies limits the ability to fully characterize the outcomes among these patients. A better understanding of the long-term health impact of firearm injury would support systematic change in policy and patient care to improve outcomes.

Pelvic organ prolapse: An unusual cause of small bowel obstruction.

We present the rare case of a small bowel obstruction secondary to pelvic organ prolapse (POP). A 77-year-old female presented with four days of abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. She had a history of abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-opherectomy and a mildly symptomatic cystocele. She was found to have an enterocele causing small bowel obstruction. The enterocele was manually reduced and subsequently managed non-operatively with a pessary. Prior case reports of small bowel obstructions secondary to POP required emergent surgical intervention. Post-menopausal women should be asked about symptoms or presence of pelvic organ prolapse and in the correct patient population, pelvic examination can be important for diagnosis and treatment of small bowel obstruction. If the enterocele is manually reduced non-operative management can be safe and effective.