Open vs Endovascular Treatment of Traumatic Peripheral Arterial Injury: Propensity Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Arterial injuries occur in the setting of blunt and penetrating trauma. Despite increasing use, there remains a paucity of data comparing long-term outcomes of endovascular vs open repair management of these injuries. The aim of our study was to compare outcomes and readmission rates of open vs endovascular repair of traumatic arterial injuries. STUDY DESIGN: The National Readmission Database (2011-2014) was queried for all adult (age ≥ 18 y) patients presenting with peripheral arterial (axillary, brachial, femoral, and popliteal) injuries. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on intervention: open vs endovascular approach. Propensity score matching (1:2 ratio) was performed. Outcomes measures were complications, length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, and cost of readmission. RESULTS: A matched cohort of 786 patients was obtained (endovascular: 262, open: 524). Mean age was 45 ± 17 years, and 79% were males. Median LOS was 4 (range 2-6) days for the endovascular group vs 3 (range 2-5) days for the open group (p < 0.01). The endovascular group had higher rates of seroma (4% vs 2%; p = 0.04) and arterial thrombosis (13% vs 7%; p < 0.01) during index hospitalization. Patients who underwent endovascular repair had higher 30-day readmission (11% vs 7%; p = 0.03) and a higher 30-day open-reoperation rate (6% vs 2%; p < 0.01). On subanalysis of the patients who were readmitted, the median cost of each readmission was higher in the endovascular group $47,000 ($27,202-$56,763) compared with $21,000 ($11,889-$43,503) in the open group. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair for peripheral arterial injuries was associated with higher rates of in-hospital complications, readmissions, and costs. As this new technology continues to undergo refinement, a thorough re-evaluation of its indications, risks, and benefits is warranted.

Looking beyond the eyeball test: A novel vitality index to predict recovery after esophagectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To (1) measure 4 physiologic metrics before esophagectomy, (2) use these in an index to predict composite postoperative outcome after esophagectomy, and (3) compare predictive accuracy of this index to that of the Fried Frailty Index and Modified Frailty Index. METHODS: Grip strength (kilograms), 30-second chair sit-stands (number), 6-minute walk distance (meters), and normalized psoas muscle area (cm2/m) were measured for 77 consenting patients from January 1, 2018, to April 1, 2019. Imbalanced random forest classification estimated probability of a composite postoperative outcome, which included mortality, respiratory complications, anastomotic leak, delirium, length of stay ≥14 days, discharge to nursing facility, and readmission. G-mean error was used to compare predictive accuracy among indexes. RESULTS: Median grip strength was 38 kg (25th-75th percentiles, 31-44), number of sit-stands 11 (10-14), psoas muscle area to height ratio 6.9 cm2/m (6.0-8.2), and 6-minute walk distance 407 m (368-451). There was generally weak correlation between these metrics, with the highest between 30-second sit-stands and 6-minute walk distance (r = 0.57). Age, degree of patient-reported exhaustion, and the 4 objective metrics comprised the Esophageal Vitality Index, which had a lower G-mean error of 32% (31-33) than the Fried Frailty Index, 37% (37-38), and the Modified Frailty Index, 48% (47-48). CONCLUSIONS: The Esophageal Vitality Index, an objective, simple assessment consisting of grip strength, 30-second chair sit-stands, 6-minute walk, and psoas muscle area to height ratio outperformed commonly used frailty indexes in predicting postesophagectomy mortality and morbidity. The index provides a robust picture of patients' fitness for surgery beyond the qualitative "eyeball" test.

The Impact of FASTPASS: A Collaboration With Emergency Department to Improve Management of Patients With Gallbladder Disease and Acute Appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Efficient Emergency Department (ED) throughput depends on several factors, including collaboration and consultation with surgical services. The acute care surgery service (ACS) collaborated with ED to implement a new process termed "FASTPASS" (FP), which might improve patient-care for those with acute appendicitis and gallbladder disease. The aim of this study was to evaluate the 1-year outcome of FP. METHODS: FASTPASS is a joint collaboration between ACS and ED. ED physicians were provided with a simple check-list for diagnosing young males (<50-year old) with acute appendicitis (AA) and young males or females (<50-year old) with gallbladder disease (GBD). Once ED deemed patients fit our FP check-list, patients were directly admitted (FASTPASSed) to the observation unit. The ACS then came to evaluate the patients for possible surgical intervention. We performed outcome analysis before and after the institution of the FP. Outcomes of interest were ED length of stay (LOS), time from ED to the operating room (OR) (door-to-knife), hospital LOS (HLOS), and cost. RESULTS: During our 1-year study period, for those patients who underwent GBD/AA surgery, 56 (26%) GBD and 27 (26%) AA patients met FP criteria. Compared to the non-FP patients during FP period, FP halved ED LOS for GBD (7.4 ± 3.0 versus 3.5 ± 1.7 h, P < 0.001) and AA (6.7 ± 3.3 versus. 1.8 ± 1.6 h, P < 0.001). Similar outcome benefits were observed for door-to-knife time, HLOS, and costs. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the FP process improved ED throughput in a single, highly-trained ER leading to an overall improved patient care process. A future study involving multiple EDs and different disease processes may help decrease ED overcrowding and improve healthcare system efficiency.

Barriers to improving health care value in emergency general surgery: A nationwide analysis.

INTRODUCTION: There is a growing need to improve the quality of care while decreasing health care costs in emergency general surgery (EGS). Health care value includes costs and quality and is a targeted metric by improvement programs. The aim of our study was to evaluate the trend of health care value in EGS over time and to identify barriers to high-value surgical care. METHODS: The (2012-2015) National Readmission Database was queried for patients 18 years or older who underwent an EGS procedure (according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma definition). Health care value (V = quality metrics/cost) was calculated from the rates of freedom from readmission, major complications, reoperation, and failure to rescue (FTR) indexed over inflation-adjusted hospital costs. Outcomes were the trends in the quality metrics: 6-month readmission, major complications, reoperation, FTR, hospital costs, and health care value over the study period. Multivariable linear regression was performed to determine the predictors of lower health care value. RESULTS: We identified 887,013 patients who underwent EGS. Mean ± SD age was 51 ± 20 years, and 53% were male. The rates of 6-month readmission, major complications, reoperation, and FTR increased significantly over the study period. The median hospital costs also increased over the study period (2012, US $9,600 to 2015, US $13,000; p < 0.01). However, the health care value has decreased over the study period (2012, 0.35; 2013, 0.30; 2014, 0.28; 2015, 0.25; p < 0.01). Predictors of decreased health care value in EGS are age 65 years or older (ß = -0.568 [-0.689 to -0.418], more than three comorbidities (ß = -0.292 [-0.359 to -0.21]), readmission to a different hospital (ß = -0.755 [-0.914 to -0.558]), admission to low volume centers (ß = -0.927 [-1.126 to -0.682]), lack of rehabilitation (ß = -0.004 [-0.005 to -0.003]), and admission on a weekend (ß = -0.318 [-0.366 to -0.254]). CONCLUSION: Health care value in EGS appears to be declining over time. Some of the factors leading to decreased health care value in EGS are potentially modifiable. Health care value could potentially be improved by reducing fragmentation of care and promoting regionalization. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic, level IV.

Overutilization of Helicopter Transport in the Minimally Burned-A Healthcare System Problem That Should Be Corrected.

Eighty-eight percent of all patients burned in North America suffer burns of less than 20% TBSA. These patients may need care at a burn center, but barring any inhalation injury or polytrauma, these patients do not require helicopter transport (HEMS). We sought to identify a cohort of patients suffering smaller burns who do not benefit from HEMS to establish significant health care system savings. A 5-year retrospective analysis of data collected from our trauma registry was performed. Patients were separated into two groups: HEMS and ground transport (EMS). A subanalysis was performed between those with smaller burns (<20% TBSA and no ICU/OR requirement). ED disposition, hospital length of stay, distance transported, and cost was analyzed. Of 616 burn patients presenting to our center, 13% were transported by HEMS, 46% by ambulance, and 61% by private vehicle. Of those transported via HEMS, 38% had been evaluated and treated at an outside hospital before transfer. Patients transported via HEMS had larger burns (13 vs 9 %TBSA; P = .002) and deeper burns (P < .001), longer hospital stays (P = .003), higher ICU admission rates (P < .001), and mortality rates (P = .003) compared with those transported by EMS. Transport distance was a mean 5.5 times greater (88 vs 16 mi) in the HEMS group (P < .001). Within this cohort, 53% of patients transported via HEMS suffered smaller burns, compared with 73% transported by EMS. A subanalysis of the smaller burns cohort showed increased distances of transport via HEMS (91 vs 18 mi; P < .001) and increased rates of admission from the ED in the EMS group (93% vs 68% by HEMS; P = .005), yet no difference in length of stay, or rates of early discharge, defined as <24-hour hospital stay. Fully 1/4 of those transported via HEMS with smaller burns were discharged from the ED after burn consultation, debridement, and dressing. Mortality in both was nil. Average cost per helicopter transport was US$29K. Accurate triage and burn center consultation before scene transport or hospital transfer could help identify patients not benefiting from HEMS yet safely transferrable by ground, or better served by early clinic follow-up, which would reduce cost without compromising care in this cohort. Annual patient savings approximating US$444K could be multiplied were non-HEMS transport universally adopted for smaller burns.

3-Factor Versus 4-Factor PCC in Coagulopathy of Trauma: Four is Better Than Three.

INTRODUCTION: Coagulopathy of trauma (COT) is common and highly lethal. Prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) has been advocated for correction of COT. However, the difference in efficacy between three-factor PCC (3-PCC) versus four-factor PCC (4-PCC) remains unclear. The aim of our study was to compare efficacy of 3-PCC versus 4-PCC in COT. METHODS: Five-year (2013-2017) review of coagulopathic trauma patients at our Level-I trauma center who received 3- or 4-PCC. Patients were divided into two groups (4-PCC and 3-PCC) and matched in 1:1 ratio using propensity-score-matching for demographics, injury parameters, admission vitals, and hematological parameters. Primary outcomes were time to correction of international normalized ratio (INR), blood products transfusion, thromboembolic complications, and mortality. Secondary outcomes were hospital-length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU)-LOS, cost of therapy, and total hospital cost. RESULTS: Six hundred fifty-seven patients met inclusion criteria of whom 250 patients (4-PCC:125; 3-PCC:125) were matched. The mean age was 50 ±â€Š19.4 y, 64% were male, and median-injury severity score was 24[15-33]. 4-PCC was associated with accelerated correction of INR (365 vs. 428 min, P = 0.01), decrease in red blood cells (7 units vs. 10 units, P = 0.04) and FFP (6 units vs. 8 units, P = 0.03) transfused. There was no difference in platelet transfusion, thromboembolic complications, mortality, hospital, and ICU-LOS. 4-PCC was associated with higher cost of PCC therapy, and lower cost of transfusion. There was no difference regarding the total hospital cost between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Compared with 3-factor PCC, the use of 4-factor PCC is associated with a rapid reversal of INR and reduction in transfusion requirement without increasing the overall hospital cost or the risk of thromboembolic events. 4-PCC may be preferred as an adjunct for the resuscitation of coagulopathic trauma patients.

The burden of excess length of stay in trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Disposition of trauma patients frequently results in excessive hospital-stay. The aim of this study was to assess the risk of developing complications due to excessive stay in the hospital. METHODS: Over a period of 4 years (2012-2015) we analyzed all trauma patients with hospital length-of-stay (h-LOS) >30 days. Outcome measures were complications after termination of medical care. RESULTS: 416 patients were identified having h-LOS>30 days of which 61.0% (254) had an excess hospital stay and were included. The most common causes of excess hospital stay were placement in SNiF followed by placement in Inpatient-Rehabilitation. Excessive hospital-stay was independently associated with the development of complications (p = 0.004). Each excess day in the hospital after completion of medical care was associated with 5% higher odds of complications (OR [95%CI]: 1.05[1.02-1.09]) independent of presenting condition of the patient. CONCLUSION: Each extra day spent in the hospital after completion of medical care was associated with higher odds of developing complications.

Massive Transfusion: The Revised Assessment of Bleeding and Transfusion (RABT) Score.

BACKGROUND: Massive transfusion (MT) is a lifesaving treatment for trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock, assessed by Assessment of Blood Consumption (ABC) Score based on mechanism of injury, systolic blood pressure (SBP), tachycardia, and FAST exam. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of ABC score by replacing hypotension and tachycardia; with Shock Index (SI) > 1.0 and including pelvic fractures. METHODS: We performed a 2-year (2014-2015) analysis of all high-level trauma activations and excluded patients dead on arrival. The ABC score was calculated using the 4-point score [blunt (0)/penetrating trauma (1), HR ≥ 120 (1), SBP ≤ 90 mmHg (1), and FAST positive (1)]. The Revised Assessment of Bleeding and Transfusion (RABT) score also included 4 points, calculated by replacing HR and SBP with SI > 1.0 and including pelvic fracture. AUROC compared performances of the two scores. RESULTS: A total of 380 patients were included. The overall MT was 27%. Patients receiving MT had higher median ABC scores [1.1 (0-2) vs. 1 (0-2), p = 0.15] and RABT scores [2 (1-3) vs. 1 (0-2), p < 0.001]. The RABT score had better discriminative power (AUROC = 0.828) compared to ABC score (AUROC = 0.617) for predicting the need for MT. Cutoff of RABT score ≥ 2 had a sensitivity of 84% and specificity of 77% for predicting need for MT compared to ABC score with 39% sensitivity and 72% specificity. CONCLUSION: Replacement of hypotension and tachycardia with a SI > 1.0 and inclusion of pelvic fracture enhanced discrimination of ABC score for predicting the need for MT. The current ABC score would benefit from revision to more appropriately identify patients requiring MT.

Burden and Risk Factors for Cold-Related Illness and Death in New York City.

Exposure to cold weather can cause cold-related illness and death, which are preventable. To understand the current burden, risk factors, and circumstances of exposure for illness and death directly attributed to cold, we examined hospital discharge, death certificate, and medical examiner data during the cold season from 2005 to 2014 in New York City (NYC), the largest city in the United States. On average each year, there were 180 treat-and-release emergency department visits (average annual rate of 21.6 per million) and 240 hospital admissions (29.6 per million) for cold-related illness, and 15 cold-related deaths (1.8 per million). Seventy-five percent of decedents were exposed outdoors. About half of those exposed outdoors were homeless or suspected to be homeless. Of the 25% of decedents exposed indoors, none had home heat and nearly all were living in single-family or row homes. The majority of deaths and illnesses occurred outside of periods of extreme cold. Unsheltered homeless individuals, people who use substances and become incapacitated outdoors, and older adults with medical and psychiatric conditions without home heat are most at risk. This information can inform public health prevention strategies and interventions.

Geriatric rescue after surgery (GRAS) score to predict failure-to-rescue in geriatric emergency general surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric-patients(GP) undergoing emergency-general-surgery(EGS) are vulnerable to develop adverse-outcomes. Impact of patient-level-factors on Failure-to-Rescue(FTR) in EGS-GP remains unclear. Aim of our study was to determine factors associated with FTR(death from major-complication) and devise simple-bedside-score that predicts FTR in EGS-GP. METHODS: 3-year(2013-15) analysis of patients, age≥65y on acute-care-surgery-service and underwent EGS. Regression analysis used to analyze factors associated with FTR and natural-logarithm of significant odds-ratio used to calculate estimated-weights for each factor. Geriatric-Rescue-After-Surgery(GRAS)-score calculated for each-patient. AUROC used to assess model discrimination. RESULTS: 725 EGS-patients analyzed. 44.6%(n = 324) had major-complications. The FTR-rate was 11.5%. Overall-mortality rate was 15.3%. On regression, significant-factors with their estimated-weights were:Age≥80y(2), Chronic-Obstructive-Pulmonary-Disease(COPD)(1), Chronic-renal-failure(CRF)(2), Congestive-heart-failure(CHF)(1), Albumin<3.5(1) and ASA score>3(2). AUROC of score was 0.787. CONCLUSION: GRAS-score is first score based on preoperative assessment that can reliably predict FTR in EGS-GP. Preoperative identification of patients at increased-risk of FTR can help in risk-stratification and timely-mobilization of resources for successful rescue of these patients.

The assessment of circulating volume using inferior vena cava collapse index and carotid Doppler velocity time integral in healthy volunteers: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of circulating volume and the requirement for fluid replacement are fundamental to resuscitation but remain largely empirical. Passive leg raise (PLR) may determine fluid responders while avoiding potential fluid overload. We hypothesised that inferior vena cava collapse index (IVCCI) and carotid artery blood flow would change predictably in response to PLR, potentially providing a non-invasive tool to assess circulating volume and identifying fluid responsive patients. METHODS: We conducted a prospective proof of concept pilot study on fasted healthy volunteers. One operator measured IVC diameter during quiet respiration and sniff, and carotid artery flow. Stroke volume (SV) was also measured using suprasternal Doppler. Our primary endpoint was change in IVCCI after PLR. We also studied changes in IVCCI after "sniff", and correlation between carotid artery flow and SV. RESULTS: Passive leg raise was associated with significant reduction in the mean inferior vena cava collapsibility index from 0.24 to 0.17 (p < 0.01). Mean stroke volume increased from 56.0 to 69.2 mL (p < 0.01). There was no significant change in common carotid artery blood flow. Changes in physiology consequent upon passive leg raise normalised rapidly. DISCUSSION: Passive leg raise is associated with a decrease of IVCCI and increase in stroke volume. However, the wide range of values observed suggests that factors other than circulating volume predominate in determining the proportion of collapse with respiration. CONCLUSION: In contrast to other studies, we did not find that carotid blood flow increased with passive leg raise. Rapid normalisation of post-PLR physiology may account for this.

Stress among surgical attending physicians and trainees: A quantitative assessment during trauma activation and emergency surgeries.

BACKGROUND: The adverse effects of stress on the wellness of trauma team members are well established; however, the level of stress has never been quantitatively assessed. The aim of our study was to assess the level of stress using subjective data and objective heart rate variability (HRV) among attending surgeons (ASs), junior residents (JRs) (PGY2/PGY3), and senior residents (SRs) (PGY5/PGY6) during trauma activation and emergency surgery. METHODS: We preformed a prospective study enrolling participants over eight 24-hour calls in our Level I trauma center. Stress was assessed based on decrease in HRV, which was recorded using body worn sensors. Stress was defined as HRV of less than 85% of baseline HRV. We collected subjective data on stress for each participant during calls. Three groups (ASs, JRs, SRs) were compared for duration of different stress levels through trauma activation and emergency surgery. RESULTS: A total of 22 participants (ASs: n = 8, JRs: n = 7, SRs: n = 7) were evaluated over 192 hours, which included 33 trauma activations and 50 emergency surgeries. Stress level increased during trauma activations and operations regardless of level of training. The ASs had significantly lower stress when compared with SRs and JRs during trauma activation (21.9 ± 10.7 vs. 51.9 ± 17.2 vs. 64.5 ± 11.6; p < 0.001) and emergency surgery (30.8 ± 7.0 vs. 53.33 ± 6.9 vs. 56.1 ± 3.8; p < 0.001). The level of stress was similar between JRs and SRs during trauma activation (p = 0.37) and emergency surgery (p = 0.19). There was no correlation between objectively measured stress level and subjectively measured stress using State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (R = 0.16; p = 0.01) among surgeons or residents. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeon wellness is a significant concern, and this study provides empirical evidence that trauma and acute care surgeons encounter mental strain and fail to recognize it. Stress management and burnout are very important in this high-intensity field, and this research may provide some insight in finding those practitioners who are at risk. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic study, level II.

The impact of patient protection and Affordable Care Act on trauma care: A step in the right direction.

INTRODUCTION: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was implemented to guarantee financial coverage for health care for all Americans. The implementation of ACA is likely to influence the insurance status of Americans and reimbursement rates of trauma centers. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of ACA on the patient insurance status, hospital reimbursements, and clinical outcomes at a Level I trauma center. We hypothesized that there would be a significant decrease in the proportion of uninsured trauma patients visiting our Level I trauma center following the ACA, and this is associated with improved reimbursement. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the trauma registry and financial database at our Level I trauma center for a 27-month (July 2012 to September 2014) period by quarters. Our outcome measures were change in insurance status, hospital reimbursement rates (total payments/expected payments), and clinical outcomes before and after ACA (March 31, 2014). Trend analysis was performed to assess trends in outcomes over each quarter (3 months). RESULTS: A total of 9,892 patients were included in the study. The overall uninsured rate during the study period was 20.3%. Post-ACA period was associated with significantly lower uninsured rate (p < 0.001). During the same time, there was as a significant increase in the Medicaid patients (p = 0.009). This was associated with significantly improved hospital reimbursements (p < 0.001).On assessing clinical outcomes, there was no change in hospitalization (p = 0.07), operating room procedures (p = 0.99), mortality (p = 0.88), or complications (p = 0.20). Post-ACA period was also not associated with any change in the hospital (p = 0.28) or length of stay at intensive care unit (p = 0.66). CONCLUSION: The implementation of ACA has led to a decrease in the number of uninsured trauma patients. There was a significant increase in Medicaid trauma patients. This was associated with an increase in hospital reimbursements that substantially improved the financial revenues. Despite the controversies, implementation of ACA has the potential to substantially improve the financial outcomes of trauma centers through Medicaid expansion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and value-based evaluation, level III.

Antibiotics for appendicitis! Not so fast.

BACKGROUND: Emerging literature in acute appendicitis favors the nonoperative management of acute appendicitis. However, the actual use of this practice on a national level is not assessed. The aim of this study was to assess the changing trends in nonoperative management of acute appendicitis and its effects on patient outcomes. METHODS: We did an 8-year (2004-2011) retrospective analysis of the National Inpatient Sample database. We included all inpatients with the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Patients with a diagnosis of appendiceal abscess or patients who underwent surgery for any other pathology were excluded from the analysis. Jonckheere-Terpstra trend analysis was performed for operative versus nonoperative management and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 436,400 cases of acute appendicitis were identified. Mean age of the population was 33 ± 19.5 years, and 54.5% were male. There was no significant change in the number of acute appendicitis diagnosed over the study period (p = 0.2). During the study period, nonoperative management of acute appendicitis increased significantly from 4.5% in 2004 to 6% in 2011 (p < 0.001). When compared with operatively managed patients, conservatively managed patients had a significantly longer hospital length of stay (3 [2-6] vs. 2 [1-3] days, p < 0.001), and in-hospital complications (27.8% vs. 7%, p < 0.001). On comparison of open and laparoscopic appendectomy, both had shorter hospital length of stay and rate of in-hospital complications. Overall hospital charges were lower in patients managed conservatively (15,441 [8,070-31,688] vs. 20,062 [13,672-29,928] USD, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nonoperative management of appendicitis has increased over time; however, outcomes of nonoperative management did not improve over the study period. A more in-depth analysis of patient and system demographics may reveal this disparity in trends. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic/prognostic study, level III.

Improving Hospital Quality and Costs in Nonoperative Traumatic Brain Injury: The Role of Acute Care Surgeons.

IMPORTANCE: The role of acute care surgeons is evolving; however, no guidelines exist for the selective treatment of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) exclusively by acute care surgeons. We implemented the Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG) for managing TBI at our institution on March 1, 2012. OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes in patients with TBI before and after implementation of the BIG protocol. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a 2-year analysis of our prospectively maintained database of all patients with TBI (findings of skull fracture and/or intracranial hemorrhage on an initial computed tomographic scan of the head) who presented to our level I trauma center. The pre-BIG group included patients with TBI from March 1, 2011, through February 29, 2012, and the post-BIG group included patients from July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2013. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were patients with repeated computed tomography of the head and neurosurgical consultations. Secondary outcome measures were findings of progression of intracranial hemorrhage on repeated computed tomographic scans, neurosurgical intervention, hospital admission, intensive care unit admission, hospital and intensive care unit length of stay, 30-day readmission rate, and hospital costs per patient. RESULTS: A total of 796 patients (415 in the pre-BIG group and 381 in the post-BIG group) were included. There was a significant reduction (19.0%) in the rate of neurosurgical consultation (post-BIG group, 273 patients [71.7%]; pre-BIG group, 376 [90.6%]; P < .001), repeated computed tomography of the head (post-BIG group, 255 patients [66.9%]; pre-BIG group, 381 patients [91.8%]; P < .001), hospital (post-BIG group, 330 [86.6%]; pre-BIG group, 398 [95.9%]; P < .001) and intensive care unit admission (post-BIG group, 202 [53.0%]; pre-BIG group, 257 [61.9%]; P = .01), hospital length of stay (post-BIG group, 5.4 [4.5] days; pre-BIG group, 6.1 [4.8] days; P = .03), and hospital costs per patient ($4772 per patient; P = .03) with implementation of BIG. There was no difference in the in-hospital mortality rate (post-BIG group, 62 patients [16.3%]; pre-BIG group, 69 patients [16.6%]; P = .89), progression of intracranial hemorrhage on repeated scans (post-BIG group, 41 patients [10.8%]; pre-BIG group, 59 patients [14.2%]; P = .14), neurosurgical intervention (post-BIG group, 61 patients [16.0%]; pre-BIG group, 59 patients [14.2%]; P = .48), and 30-day readmission rate (post-BIG group, 31 patients [8.1%]; pre-BIG group, 37 patients [8.9%]; P = .69) after implementation of BIG. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Implementation of BIG is safe and cost-effective. BIG defines the management of TBI without the need for neurosurgical consultation and unnecessary imaging. Establishing a national, multi-institutional study implementing the BIG protocol is warranted.

Overuse of helicopter transport in the minimally injured: A health care system problem that should be corrected.

BACKGROUND: Mortality benefit has been demonstrated for trauma patients transported via helicopter but at great cost. This study identified patients who did not benefit from helicopter transport to our facility and demonstrates potential cost savings when transported instead by ground. METHODS: We performed a 6-year (2007-2013) retrospective analysis of all trauma patients presenting to our center. Patients with a known mode of transfer were included in the study. Patients with missing data and those who were dead on arrival were excluded from the study. Patients were then dichotomized into helicopter transfer and ground transfer groups. A subanalysis was performed between minimally injured patients (ISS < 5) in both the groups after propensity score matching for demographics, injury severity parameters, and admission vital parameters. Groups were then compared for hospital and emergency department length of stay, early discharge, and mortality. RESULTS: Of 5,202 transferred patients, 18.9% (981) were transferred via helicopter and 76.7% (3,992) were transferred via ground transport. Helicopter-transferred patients had longer hospital (p = 0.001) and intensive care unit (p = 0.001) stays. There was no difference in mortality between the groups (p = 0.6).On subanalysis of minimally injured patients there was no difference in hospital length of stay (p = 0.1) and early discharge (p = 0.6) between the helicopter transfer and ground transfer group. Average helicopter transfer cost at our center was $18,000, totaling $4,860,000 for 270 minimally injured helicopter-transferred patients. CONCLUSION: Nearly one third of patients transported by helicopter were minimally injured. Policies to identify patients who do not benefit from helicopter transport should be developed. Significant reduction in transport cost can be made by judicious selection of patients. Education to physicians calling for transport and identification of alternate means of transportation would be both safe and financially beneficial to our system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic study, level III. Therapeutic study, level IV.

Management of acute mild gallstone pancreatitis under acute care surgery: should patients be admitted to the surgery or medicine service?

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that patients with acute mild gallstone pancreatitis (GSP) admitted to surgery (SUR; vs medicine [MED]) had a shorter time to surgery, shorter hospital length of stay (HLOS), and lower costs. METHODS: We performed chart reviews of patients who underwent a cholecystectomy for acute mild GSP from October 1, 2009 to May 31, 2013. We excluded patients with moderate to severe and non-gallstone pancreatitis. We compared outcomes for time to surgery, HLOS, costs, and complications between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Fifty acute mild GSP patients were admitted to MED and 52 to SUR. MED patients were older and had more comorbidity. SUR patients had a shorter time to surgery (44 vs 80 hours; P < .001), a shorter HLOS (3 vs 5 days; P < .001), and lower hospital costs ($11,492 ± 6,480 vs $16,183 ± 12,145; P = .03). In our subgroup analysis on patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists score between 1 and 2, the subgroups were well matched; all outcomes still favored SUR patients. CONCLUSIONS: Admitting acute mild GSP patients directly to SUR shortened the time to surgery, shortened HLOS, and lowered hospital costs.

Prothrombin complex concentrate use in coagulopathy of lethal brain injuries increases organ donation.

Coagulopathy is a defined barrier for organ donation in patients with lethal traumatic brain injuries. The purpose of this study was to document our experience with the use of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) to facilitate organ donation in patients with lethal traumatic brain injuries. We performed a 4-year retrospective analysis of all patients with devastating gunshot wounds to the brain. The data were analyzed for demographics, change in international normalized ratio (INR), and subsequent organ donation. The primary end point was organ donation. Eighty-eight patients with lethal traumatic brain injury were identified from the trauma registry of whom 13 were coagulopathic at the time of admission (mean INR 2.2 ± 0.8). Of these 13 patients, 10 patients received PCC in an effort to reverse their coagulopathy. Mean INR before PCC administration was 2.01 ± 0.7 and 1.1 ± 0.7 after administration (P < 0.006). Correction of coagulopathy was attained in 70 per cent (seven of 10) patients. Of these seven patients, consent for donation was obtained in six patients and resulted in 19 solid organs being procured. The cost of PCC per patient was $1022 ± 544. PCC effectively reveres coagulopathy associated with lethal traumatic brain injury and enabled patients to proceed to organ donation. Although various methodologies exist for the treatment of coagulopathy to facilitate organ donation, PCC provides a rapid and cost-effective therapy for reversal of coagulopathy in patients with lethal traumatic brain injuries.

Superiority of frailty over age in predicting outcomes among geriatric trauma patients: a prospective analysis.

IMPORTANCE: The Frailty Index (FI) is a known predictor of adverse outcomes in geriatric patients. The usefulness of the FI as an outcome measure in geriatric trauma patients is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the usefulness of the FI as an effective assessment tool in predicting adverse outcomes in geriatric trauma patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A 2-year (June 2011 to February 2013) prospective cohort study at a level I trauma center at the University of Arizona. We prospectively measured frailty in all geriatric trauma patients. Geriatric patients were defined as those 65 years or older. The FI was calculated using 50 preadmission frailty variables. Frailty in patients was defined by an FI of 0.25 or higher. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was in-hospital complications. The secondary outcome measure was adverse discharge disposition. In-hospital complications were defined as cardiac, pulmonary, infectious, hematologic, renal, and reoperation. Adverse discharge disposition was defined as discharge to a skilled nursing facility or in-hospital mortality. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between the FI and outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 250 patients were enrolled, with a mean (SD) age of 77.9 (8.1) years, median Injury Severity Score of 15 (range, 9-18), median Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15 (range, 12-15), and mean (SD) FI of 0.21 (0.10). Forty-four percent (n = 110) of patients had frailty. Patients with frailty were more likely to have in-hospital complications (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-6.0; P = .001) and adverse discharge disposition (odds ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4; P = .001). The mortality rate was 2.0% (n = 5), and all patients who died had frailty. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The FI is an independent predictor of in-hospital complications and adverse discharge disposition in geriatric trauma patients. This index should be used as a clinical tool for risk stratification in this patient group.

Validating trauma-specific frailty index for geriatric trauma patients: a prospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Frailty Index has been shown to predict discharge disposition in geriatric patients. The aim of this study was to validate the modified 15-variable Trauma-Specific Frailty Index (TSFI) to predict discharge disposition in geriatric trauma patients. We hypothesized that TSFI can predict discharge disposition in geriatric trauma patients. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a 2-year (2011-2013) prospective analysis of all geriatric trauma patients presenting to our Level I trauma center. Patient discharge disposition was dichotomized into unfavorable (discharge to skilled nursing facility or death) and favorable (discharge to home or rehabilitation center) discharge disposition. Patients were evaluated using the developed 15-variable TSFI. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify factors that predict unfavorable discharge disposition. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients were enrolled for validation of TSFI. Mean age was 77 ± 12.1 years, median Injury Severity Score was 15 (interquartile range [IQR] 9 to 20), median Glasgow Coma Scale score was 14 (IQR 13 to 15), and median Frailty Index score was 0.20 (IQR 0.17 to 0.28); 29.5% (n = 59) patients had unfavorable discharge. After adjusting for age, sex, Injury Severity Score, Head Abbreviated Injury Scale, and vitals on admission, Frailty Index (odds ratio = 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.5) was the only significant predictor for unfavorable discharge disposition. Age (odds ratio = 1.2; 95% CI, 0.9-3.1; p = 0.2) was not predictive of unfavorable discharge disposition. CONCLUSIONS: The 15-variable TSFI is an independent predictor of unfavorable discharge disposition in geriatric trauma patients. The Trauma-Specific Frailty Index is an effective tool that can aid clinicians in planning discharge disposition of geriatric trauma patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II Prognostic Studies-Investigating the Effect of a Patient Characteristic on the Outcome of Disease.