Discrepancies in Mass Shootings and Access to Trauma Care Across the United States, 2014-2018.

INTRODUCTION: The United States has one of the highest rates of gun violence and mass shootings. Timely medical attention in such events is critical. The objective of this study was to assess geographic disparities in mass shootings and access to trauma centers. METHODS: Data for all Level I and II trauma centers were extracted from the American College of Surgeons and the Trauma Center Association of America registries. Mass shooting event data (4+ individuals shot at a single event) were taken from the Gun Violence Archive between 2014 and 2018. RESULTS: A total of 564 trauma centers and 1672 mass shootings were included. Ratios of the number of mass shootings vs trauma centers per state ranged from 0 to 11.0 mass shootings per trauma center. States with the greatest disparity (highest ratio) included Louisiana and New Mexico. CONCLUSION: States in the southern regions of the US experience the greatest disparity due to a high burden of mass shootings with less access to trauma centers. Interventions are needed to increase access to trauma care and reduce mass shootings in these medically underserved areas.

Initial assessment on the impact of crystalloids versus colloids during damage control resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: High ratios of fresh frozen plasma:packed red blood cells in damage control resuscitation (DCR) are associated with increased survival. The impact of volume and type of resuscitative fluid used during high ratio transfusion has not been analyzed. We hypothesize a difference in outcomes based on the type and quantity of resuscitative fluid used in patients that received high ratio DCR. METHODS: A matched case control study of patients who received transfusions of ≥ four units of PRBC during damage control surgery over 4 1/2 y, was conducted at a Level I Trauma Center. All patients received a high ratio DCR, >1:2 of fresh frozen plasma:packed red blood cells. Demographics and outcomes of the type and quantity of resuscitative fluids used in combination with high ratio DCR were compared and analyzed. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was computed among four groups: colloid (median quantity = 1.0 L), <3 L crystalloid, 3-6 L crystalloid, and >6 L crystalloid. RESULTS: There were 56 patients included in the analysis (28 in the crystalloid group and 28 in the colloid group). Demographics were statistically similar. Intraoperative median units of PRBC: crystalloid versus colloid groups was 13 (IQR 8-21) versus 16 (IQR 12-19), P = 0.135; median units of FFP: 12 (IQR 7-18) versus 12 (IQR 10-18), P = 0.440. OR for 10-d mortality in the crystalloid group was 8.41 [95% CI 1.65-42.76 (P = 0.01)]. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated lowest mortality in the colloid group and higher mortality with increasing amounts of crystalloid (P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: During high ratio DCR, resuscitation with higher volumes of crystalloids was associated with an overall decreased survival, whereas low volumes of colloid use were associated with increased survival. In order to improve outcomes without diluting the survival benefit of hemostatic resuscitation, guidelines should focus on effective low volume resuscitation when high ratio DCR is used. A multi-institutional analysis is needed in order to validate these results.

Universal consent practice in academic intensive care units (ICUs).

UNLABELLED: The purpose of this study was to determine national practice for obtaining consent in academic adult intensive care units (ICUs) for routine bedside procedures and to define universal consent rates by patient demographics within our own institution's ICUs. METHODS: A 10-question survey was sent to the program directors for all U.S. surgical and pulmonary critical care directors regarding consent practices. Further, the adoption of a universal consent protocol in an academic county hospital was studied. RESULTS: Cross-sectional study: Thirty-seven percent of program directors completed the survey. Consent rates varied from 35% to 97% by procedure, with only 14% using a universal consent document. Providers in Medical ICUs obtained consent more often than in Surgical ICUs for both central line and pulmonary artery catheter placement (82.8% and 93.1% vs. 52.6% and 52.6%, respectively). Prospective cohort study: At our institution, 90% of 363 patients or their proxies signed universal consent for procedures, 4.4% consent with exemptions, while 5.2% refused. Insured patients were 2.7 times more likely to sign full universal consent for bedside ICU procedures than uninsured patients. CONCLUSION: There was a national variation in ICU consent practices with an interest in a wider usage of universal consent protocols. The latter was adopted differentially based on patient demographics. Universal consent was widely accepted at our institution.