Implementation of a Traumatic Brain Injury Guideline at A Department of Defense Level 1 Trauma Center.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the most prevalent diagnoses among trauma populations and places significant strain on valuable rural hospital resources. Limited studies show safety and efficacy of implementation of a Brain Injury Guideline (BIG) protocol at a Department of Defense (DoD) Level 1 trauma center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from patients diagnosed with traumatic brain injury during the study period were collected from our institutional trauma database. A retrospective review was performed on patients identified in the database to collect demographic and injury related data. All primary and secondary outcome data were analyzed using two-tailed Fischer's exact tests, Pearson Chi-square tests, and non-parametric Mann Whitney U tests. RESULTS: A total of 354 patients were included in the study, 189 pre-implementation and 165 post-implementation. Demographics, head injury severity, initial HCT findings, and BIG classification distributions were well-matched. There was a significant reduction in neurosurgical consultations (NSC) (98.4% pre- to 77.0% post-implementation, P<0.001) and ICU admissions (84.1% pre-, 74.5% post-implementation, P=0.025) following protocol implementation. There were no differences between groups in ICU LOS (P=0.239), incidence of worsening findings on RHCT (P=0.894), or in-hospital mortality (P=0.814). There was a slight reduction in hospital LOS from 4.0d pre-implementation to 3.0d post-implementation (P=0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a BIG protocol at our Level 1 trauma center suggested at a relationship with fewer NSCs and ICU admissions. Management of mild and moderate TBI by acute care and trauma surgeons without direct neurosurgical oversight is safe and implies a reduction in utilization of hospital resources.

Preoperative Risk Prediction for Pancreatectomy: A Comparative Analysis of Three Scoring Systems.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatectomy is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, patient selection and risk prediction is paramount. In this study, three validated perioperative risk scoring systems were compared among patients undergoing pancreatectomy to identify the most clinically useful model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 2014-2017 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for pancreatectomy patients. Three models were evaluated: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Universal Risk Calculator (URC), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), and Modified Frailty Index-5 Factor (mFI-5). Outcomes were 30-d mortality and complications. Predictive performance of the models was compared using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and Brier scores. RESULTS: Twenty two thousand one hundred twenty three pancreatectomy patients were identified. The 30-d mortality rate was 1.4% (n = 319). Complications occurred in 6020 cases (27.2%). AUC (95% CI) for 30-d mortality were 0.70 (0.67-0.73), 0.63 (0.60-0.67), and 0.60 (0.57-0.63) for URC, MELD, and mFI-5, respectively, with Brier score of 0.014 for all three models. AUC (95% confidence interval) for any complication was 0.59 (0.58-0.59) for URC, 0.53 (0.52-0.54) for MELD, and 0.53 (0.52-0.54) for mFI-5, with Brier scores 0.193 (URC), 0.200 (MELD), and 0.197 (mFI-5). For individual complications, URC was more predictive than MELD or mFI-5. CONCLUSIONS: Of the validated preoperative risk scoring systems, URC was most predictive of both complications and 30-d mortality. None of the models performed better than fair to good. The lack of predictive accuracy of currently existing models highlights the need for development of improved perioperative risk models.

The Respiratory Rate: A Neglected Triage Tool for Pre-hospital Identification of Trauma Patients.

BACKGROUND: Under-triaged trauma patients have worse clinical outcomes. We evaluated the capability of four pre-hospital variables to identify this population at the lowest level trauma activation (level 3). METHODS: A retrospective review of adult trauma activations from 2004 to 2014 was completed. Pre-hospital vital signs and Glasgow Coma Scale were converted to categorical variables. Patients were under-triaged based on meeting current level 1 or 2 criteria, or requiring a pre-defined critical intervention. Logistic regression was used to determine the association between the pre-hospital variables and under-triaged patients. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for a comprehensive model, grouping all causes of under-triage as a single unit, and 16 individual models, one for each under-triage criterion. A new level 2 criterion was generated and internally validated. RESULTS: In total, 12,332 activations occurred during the study period. Four hundred and sixty-six (5.9%) patients were under-triaged. Compared to patients with a normal respiratory rate (RR), tachypneic patients were more likely to be under-triaged for any reason, OR 1.7 [1.3-2.1], p < 0.001. In the individual event analysis, tachypneic patients were more likely to have flail chest, OR 22 [2.9-168.3], p = 0.003; require a chest tube, OR 3 [1.8-4.9], p < 0.001; or require emergent intubation, OR 1.6 [1.1-2.8], p = 0.04, compared to patients with a normal RR. The data-driven triage modification was tachypnea with suspected thoracic injury which reduced the under-triage rate by 1.2%. CONCLUSION: Tachypnea with suspected thoracic injury is the strongest level 2 triage modification to reduce level 3 under-triage.