Shift in Prehospital Mode of Transportation for Trauma Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, we experienced alterations to modes of transportation among trauma patients suffering penetrating injuries. Historically, a small percentage of our penetrating trauma patients use private means of prehospital transportation. Our hypothesis was that the use of private transportation among trauma patients increased during the COVID-19 pandemic and was associated with better outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all adult trauma patients (January 1, 2017 to March 19, 2021), using the date of the shelter-in-place ordinance (March 19, 2020) to separate trauma patients into prepandemic and pandemic patient groups. Patient demographics, mechanism of injury, mode of prehospital transportation, and variables such as initial Injury Severity Score, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, ICU length of stay, mechanical ventilator days, and mortality were recorded. RESULTS: We identified 11,919 adult trauma patients, 9017 (75.7%) in the prepandemic group and 2902 (24.3%) in the pandemic group. The number of patients using private prehospital transportation also increased (from 2.4% to 6.7%, P < 0.001). Between the prepandemic and pandemic private transportation cohorts, there were reductions in mean Injury Severity Score (from 8.1 ± 10.4 to 5.3 ± 6.6: P = 0.02), ICU admission rates (from 15% to 2.4%: P < 0.001), and hospital length of stay (from 4.0 ± 5.3 to 2.3 ± 1.9: P = 0.02). However, there was no difference in mortality (4.1% and 2.0%, P = 0.221). CONCLUSIONS: We found that there was a significant shift in prehospital transportation among trauma patients toward private transportation after the shelter-in-place order. However, this did not coincide with a change in mortality despite a downward trend. This phenomenon could help direct future policy and protocols in trauma systems when battling major public health emergencies.

Sofa and bed-related pediatric trauma injuries treated in United States emergency departments.

INTRODUCTION: Children under the age of 5 years suffer from the highest rates of fall-related injuries. Caretakers often leave young children on sofas and beds, however, falling and rolling off these fixtures can lead to serious injury. We investigated the epidemiologic characteristics and trends of bed and sofa-related injuries among children aged <5 years treated in US emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System from 2007 through 2021 using sample weights to estimate national numbers and rates of bed and sofa-related injuries. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were employed. RESULTS: An estimated 3,414,007 children aged <5 years were treated for bed and sofa-related injuries in emergency departments (EDs) in the United States from 2007 through 2021, averaging 115.2 injuries per 10,000 persons annually. Closed head injuries (30%) and lacerations (24%) comprised the majority of injuries. The primary location of injury was the head (71%) and upper extremity (17%). Children <1 year of age accounted for most injuries, with a 67% increase in incidence within the age group between 2007 and 2021 (p < 0.001). Falling, jumping, and rolling off beds and sofas were the primary mechanisms of injury. The proportion of jumping injuries increased with age. Approximately 4% of all injuries required hospitalization. Children <1 year of age were 1.58 times more likely to be hospitalized after injury than all other age groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Beds and sofas can be associated with injury among young children, especially infants. The annual rate of bed and sofa-related injuries among infants <1 year old is increasing, which underscores the need for increased prevention efforts, including parental education and improved safety design, to decrease these injuries.

Outcomes improvement despite continuous visits of severely injured patients during the COVID-19 outbreak: experience at a regional trauma centre in South Korea.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the changes in characteristics of patients who visited trauma centres during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is important to facilitate aneffective response. This retrospective study was conducted to analyse differences in the characteristics and outcomes of patients who visited our trauma centre between pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 eras. METHODS: Medical data of trauma patients enrolled in the Korean trauma database from 1 January 2018 to 31 August 2021 were collected. The number of trauma centre visits, patient characteristics, factors associated with in-hospital intervention, and outcomes werecompared between patients in the two time periods. Propensity score matching was performed to analyse the outcomes in patients with similar characteristics and severitybetween patients in the two time periods. RESULTS: The number of emergency department (ED) trauma service visits reduced in the COVID-19 era. Based on the mean age, the patients were older in the COVID-19 era. Abbreviated injury scale (AIS) 1, AIS3, AIS5, and injury severity score (ISS) were higher in the COVID-19 era. The proportion of motor vehicle collisions decreased, whereas falls increased during the COVID-19 era. Ambulance transportation, admission to the general ward, and time from injury to ED visit significantly increased. Patient outcomes, such as hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, and duration of mechanical ventilation improved, while injury severity worsened during the COVID-19 era. After adjusting for patient characteristics and severity, similar findings were observed. CONCLUSION: The small reduction in the number of trauma patients and visits by patients who hadhigher ISS during the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the importance of maintaining trauma service capacity and capability during the pandemic. A nationwide or nationalmulticentre study will be more meaningful to examine the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on the changes in trauma patterns, volume, and patient outcomes.

Pediatric Injury Transfer Patterns During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Interrupted time Series Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: With the expected surge of adult patients with COVID-19, the Children's Hospital Association recommended a tiered approach to divert children to pediatric centers. Our objective was understanding changes in interfacility transfer to Pediatric Trauma Centers (PTCs) during the first 6 mo of the pandemic. METHODS: Children aged < 18 y injured between January 1, 2016 and September 30, 2020, who met National Trauma Databank inclusion criteria from 9 PTCs were included. An interrupted time-series analysis was used to estimate an expected number of transferred patients compared to observed volume. The "COVID" cohort was compared to a historical cohort (historical average [HA]), using an average across 2016-2019. Site-based differences in transfer volume, demographics, injury characteristics, and hospital-based outcomes were compared between cohorts. RESULTS: Twenty seven thousand thirty one/47,382 injured patients (57.05%) were transferred to a participating PTC during the study period. Of the COVID cohort, 65.4% (4620/7067) were transferred, compared to 55.7% (3281/5888) of the HA (P < 0.001). There was a decrease in 15-y-old to 17-y-old patients (10.43% COVID versus 12.64% HA, P = 0.003). More patients in the COVID cohort had injury severity scores ≤ 15 (93.25% COVID versus 87.63% HA, P < 0.001). More patients were discharged home after transfer (31.80% COVID versus 21.83% HA, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Transferred trauma patients to Level I PTC increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. The proportion of transferred patients discharged from emergency departments increased. Pediatric trauma transfers may be a surrogate for referring emergency department capacity and resources and a measure of pediatric trauma triage capability.

The COVID-19 pandemic reduced the trauma incidence and modified its pattern in Al-Ain City, United Arab Emirates.

AIM: We aimed to study the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the pattern of injury and outcome of hospitalized trauma patients in Al-Ain City, United Arab Emirates, to use this information in the preparedness for future pandemics. METHODS: We retrospectively compared the trauma registry data of all hospitalised trauma patients, who were treated at the two main trauma centres in Al-Ain City (Al-Ain Hospital and Tawam Hospital); those who were treated over 1 year before the pandemic (n = 2002) and those who were treated at the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 1468). RESULTS: There was a 26.7% reduction in the overall incidence of trauma admissions in the COVID-19 pandemic period. The mechanism of injury significantly differed between the two periods (p < 0.0001, Fisher's exact test). There was an absolute increase in the number of injuries, due to machinery and falling objects during the pandemic (39.7% and 54.1% respectively, p < 0.001). In contrast, road traffic collisions and falls were reduced by 33.5% and 31.3%, respectively. Location significantly differed between the two periods (p < 0.0001, Fisher's exact test). There was an absolute increase of 18.4% in workplace injuries and a reduction of 39.3% in home injuries over the study period. In addition, we observed relatively more workplace injuries and fewer home injuries during the pandemic (11.3% and 42.8% compared with 7.1% and 52.4%, respectively). Mortality was similar between the two periods (1.8% compared with 1.2%, p = 0.16, Fisher's exact test). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has modified the trauma risk exposure in our population. It reduced trauma hospital admissions by around 27%. Work-related injuries, including falling objects and machinery injuries, were relatively higher during the pandemic. Prevention of work-related injuries should be an important component of preparedness for future pandemics.

Center for Trauma Survivorship improves postdischarge follow-up and retention.

BACKGROUND: Although the need for high-level care persists postdischarge, severely injured trauma survivors have historically poor adherence to follow-up. We hypothesized that a dedicated Center for Trauma Survivorship (CTS) improves follow-up and facilitates postdischarge specialty care. METHODS: A retrospective study of "CTS eligible" trauma patients before (January to December 2017) and after (January to December 2019) creation of the CTS was performed. Patients with an intensive care unit stay ≥2 days or a New Injury Severity Score of ≥16 are CTS eligible. The before (PRE) cohort was followed through December 2018 and the after (CTS) cohort through December 2020. Primary outcome was follow-up within the hospital system exclusive of mental health and rehabilitative therapy appointments. Secondary outcomes include postdischarge surgical procedures and specialty-specific follow-up. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in demographics or hospital duration in the PRE (n = 177) and CTS (n = 119) cohorts. Of the CTS group, 91% presented for outpatient follow-up within the hospital system, compared with 73% in the PRE group (p < 0.001). In the PRE cohort, only 39% were seen by the trauma service compared with 62% in the CTS cohort (p < 0.001). Center for Trauma Survivorship patients also had increased follow-up with other providers (80% vs. 65%; p = 0.006). Notably, 33% of CTS patients had additional surgery compared with only 20% in the PRE group (p = 0.011). Center for Trauma Survivorship patients had more than 20% more outpatient visits (1,280 vs. 1,006 visits). CONCLUSION: Despite the follow-up period for the CTS cohort occurring during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, limiting availability of outpatient services, our CTS significantly improved follow-up with trauma providers, as well as with other specialties. The CTS patients also underwent significantly more secondary operations. These data demonstrate that creation of a CTS can improve the postdischarge care of severely injured trauma survivors, allowing for care coordination within the health care system, retaining patients, generating revenue, and providing needed follow-up care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

"Death Diamond" Tracing on Thromboelastography as a Marker of Poor Survival After Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Improvements in health care innovations have resulted in an enhanced ability to extend patient viability. As a consequence, resources are being increasingly utilized at an unsustainable level. As we implement novel treatments, identifying futility should be a focus. The "death diamond" (DD) is a unique thrombelastography (TEG) tracing that is indicative of failure of the coagulation system, with a mortality rate exceeding 90%. The purpose of this study was to determine if the DD was a consistent marker of poor survival in a multicenter study population. We hypothesize that the DD, while an infrequent occurrence, predicts poor survival and can be used to stratify patients in whom resuscitation efforts are futile. METHODS: A retrospective multi-institutional study of trauma patients presenting with TEG DDs between 8/2008 and 12/2018 at four American College of Surgeons trauma centers was completed. Demographics, injury mechanisms, TEG results, management, and survival were examined. RESULTS: A total of 50 trauma patients presented with DD tracings, with a 94% (n = 47) mortality rate. Twenty-six (52%) patients received a repeat TEG with 10 patients re-demonstrating the DD tracing. There was 100% mortality in patients with serial DD tracings. The median use of total blood products was 18 units (interquartile range 6, 34.25) per patient. DISCUSSION: The DD is highly predictive of trauma-associated mortality. This multicenter study highlights that serial DDs may represent a possible biomarker of futility.

Unintended Consequences of COVID-19 on Pediatric Falls From Windows: A Multicenter Study.

INTRODUCTION: In attempts to quell the spread of COVID-19, shelter-in-place orders were employed in most states. Increased time at home, in combination with parents potentially balancing childcare and work-from-home duties, may have had unintended consequences on pediatric falls from windows. We aimed to investigate rates of falls from windows among children during the first 6 mo of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Patients <18 y old admitted to three pediatric trauma centers (two - level 1, one - level 2) between 3/19/20 and 9/19/20 (COVID-era) were compared to a pre-COVID cohort (3/19/19 to 9/19/19). The primary outcome was the rate of falls from windows. Secondary outcomes included injury severity score (ISS), injuries sustained, and mortality. RESULTS: Of 1011 total COVID-era pediatric trauma patients, 36 (3.6%) sustained falls from windows compared to 23 of 1108 (2.1%) pre-COVID era patients (OR 1.7, P = 0.05). The median ISS was seven pre-COVID versus four COVID-era (P = 0.43). The most common injuries sustained were skull fractures (30.5%), extremity injuries (30.5%), and intracranial hemorrhage (23.7%). One-fifth of patients underwent surgery (21.7% pre-COVID versus 19.4% COVID-era, P = 1.0). There was one mortality in the COVID-era cohort and none in the pre-COVID cohort (P = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Despite overall fewer trauma admissions during the first 6 mo of the COVID-19 pandemic, the rate of falls from windows nearly doubled compared to the prior year, with substantial associated morbidity. These findings suggest a potential unintended consequence of shelter-in-place orders and support increased education on home safety and increased support for parents potentially juggling multiple responsibilities in the home.

Changes in the characteristics of trauma patients after the early COVID-19 outbreak: A retrospective study of a regional level 1 trauma center in Republic of Korea.

ABSTRACT: Gyeonggi-do (Gyeonggi province) has the second highest number of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases in the Republic of Korea after Seoul, with approximately 25% of the COVID-19 patients as of January 2021. Our center is a level I trauma center located in south Gyeonggi-do, and we aimed to evaluate whether the characteristics of trauma patients changed after the COVID-19 pandemic.We retrospectively reviewed the trauma patients registered with the Korea Trauma Database of the Center from February 2019 to January 2021. The patients were dichotomized into pre-coronavirus disease (pre-COVID) and coronavirus disease (COVID) groups, and their trauma volumes, injury characteristics, intentionality, and outcomes were compared.A total of 2628 and 2636 patients were included in the pre-COVID and COVID groups, respectively. During the COVID-19 period, motorcycle accidents, bicycle accidents, and penetrating injury cases increased, and pedestrian traffic accidents, slips, and injury by machines decreased. The average daily number of patients in the COVID group was lower in March (5.6 ±â€Š2.6/day vs 7.2 ±â€Š2.4/day, P = .014) and higher in September (9.9 ±â€Š3.2/day vs 7.7 ±â€Š2.0/day, P = .003) compared to the pre-COVID group. The COVID group also had a higher ratio of direct admissions (67.5% vs 57.2%, P < .001), proportion of suicidal patients (4.1% vs 2.7%, P = .005), and injury severity scores (14 [9-22] vs 12 [4-22], P < .001) than the pre-COVID group. The overall mortality (4.7% vs 4.9%, P = .670) and intensive care unit length of stay (2 [0-3] days vs 2 [0-4] days, P = .153) was not different between the 2 groups.Although the total number of patients did not change, the COVID-19 pandemic affected the number of monthly admissions and the injury mechanisms changed. More severely injured patients were admitted directly to the trauma center.

The impact of COVID-19 on major trauma (ISS>15) in London, across its four Level 1 centres.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to reconfiguration of healthcare resources to manage increased demand for acute hospital beds and intensive care places. Concerns were raised regarding continuing provision of critical care for non-COVID patients during the pandemic. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients admitted with major trauma (Injury Severity Score >15) across the four Level 1 trauma centres in London. METHODS: Data were collected from all four major trauma centres (MTCs) in London using the Trauma Audit and Research Network database and from local databases at each centre. A 2-month period from 5 March to 5 May 2020 was selected and the same period during 2019 was used to compare changes due to the pandemic. RESULTS: There was a 31% decrease in overall number of patients presenting to the four MTCs during the COVID-19 period compared with 2019. There was no difference in patient demographics or mechanism of injury between the two periods. Sports-related injuries and proportion of self-presentation to hospital were reduced slightly during the pandemic, although the differences were not statistically significant. The mortality rate and association between mortality and injury severity were similar. Proportion of patients requiring intensive care unit facilities also did not change. CONCLUSION: Despite diversion of critical care resources to deal with COVID-related admissions, we did not observe a change in mortality rate or proportion of severely injured patients requiring critical care. Our results suggest London MTCs were able to provide their usual standard of care for critically injured major trauma (Injury Severity Score >15) patients during the pandemic.

Multidisciplinary, multisite trauma team training during COVID-19: lessons from the first virtual E-S.T.A.R.T.T. course.

Trauma care delivery is a complex team-based task that requires deliberate practice. The COVID-19 pandemic has not diminished the importance of excellent trauma team dynamics. However, the pandemic hampers our ability to gather safely and train together. A mitigating solution is the provision of high-fidelity simulation training in a virtual setting. The Simulated Trauma and Resuscitation Team Training (S.T.A.R.T.T.) course has provided multidisciplinary trauma team members with skills in crisis resource management (CRM) for nearly 10 years. It has promoted collaborative learning from coast to coast, as the course typically runs at our national surgical and trauma meetings. In response to COVID-19 challenges, the course content has been modified to virtually connect 2 centres in different provinces simultaneously. High participant satisfaction suggests that the new virtual E-S.T.A.R.T.T course is able to continue to help providers develop important CRM skills in a multidisciplinary setting while remaining compliant with COVID-19 safety precautions.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in special circumstances.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation prioritises treatment for cardiac arrests from a primary cardiac cause, which make up the majority of treated cardiac arrests. Early chest compressions and, when indicated, a defibrillation shock from a bystander give the best chance of survival with a good neurological status. Cardiac arrest can also be caused by special circumstances, such as asphyxia, trauma, pulmonary embolism, accidental hypothermia, anaphylaxis, or COVID-19, and during pregnancy or perioperatively. Cardiac arrests in these circumstances represent an increasing proportion of all treated cardiac arrests, often have a preventable cause, and require additional interventions to correct a reversible cause during resuscitation. The evidence for treating these conditions is mostly of low or very low certainty and further studies are needed. Irrespective of the cause, treatments for cardiac arrest are time sensitive and most effective when given early-every minute counts.

Alternative Wound Management: Translating Science into Practice.

GENERAL PURPOSE: To present a scoping review of preclinical and clinical trial evidence supporting the efficacy and/or safety of major alternative wound care agents to summarize their effects on validated elements of wound bed preparation and wound management paradigms. TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. LEARNING OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES: After participating in this educational activity, the participant will:1. Differentiate the effectiveness of the topical wound care agents included in this review.2. Compare the preventive efficacy of intravenous agents administered to trauma and surgical patients.3. Select the effectiveness of products in this review that are left in place after surgical procedures.4. Identify an oral agent that can be helpful in mitigating the effects of COVID-19.

Effective wound healing is achieved by well-timed host, cell, and environment interactions involving hemostasis, inflammation, formation of repaired dermal structures, and epithelialization, followed by months to years of scar remodeling. Globally, various natural or synthetic agents or dressings are used to optimize wound environments, prolong drug release, aid in fluid absorption, provide favorable healing environments, and act as a mechanical barrier against wound trauma. In this scoping review of evidence from the PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov databases, authors examined clinical study evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of selected phytochemicals, vehicles, polymers, and animal products considered "naturally derived" or "alternative" wound interventions to provide a summary of preclinical evidence. Agents with the most clinical evidence were honey, alginates, polyurethane, gelatin, and dextran. Practice implications are described in the context of the TIMERS clinical paradigm.

Challenges faced by doctors and nurses in wound care management during the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey and their views on telehealth.

AIM: This study aimed to determine the problems faced by physicians and nurses dealing with chronic wound care during the COVID-19 pandemic and their views on telehealth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A descriptive and cross-sectional design was used in this study. The sample comprised physicians (n = 74) and nurses (n = 271) interested in chronic wound care. Data were collected through a questionnaire form consisting of open- and closed-ended questions. RESULTS: Of the participants, 21.4% (n = 74) were physicians and 78.6% (n = 271) were nurses. Of the physicians, 45.9% (n = 34) were obliged to work in another unit during the COVID-19 period, while 43.2% continued their service related to chronic wound care, and only 17.0% (n = 18) in the wound care service before the pandemic. These rates are 51.3% (n = 139), 51.6% (n = 157) and 36.8% (n = 128) for nurses, respectively. 40.7% of the physicians (n = 33) and 34.9% of the nurses (n = 106) stated that their time had been reduced for chronic wound care. When the telehealth experiences were examined, 32.4% (n = 24) of the physicians utilized telehealth, 29.7% (n = 22) used e-visit, 77.0% (n = 57) stated that they thought telehealth was a good option, 47.3% (n = 35) utilized it for wound evaluation and treatment, and 31.9% (n = 59) used smart phones. These rates for nurses were 16.6% (n = 45), 14.0% (n = 38), 72.7% (n = 197), 33.9% (n = 92), and 27.0% (n = 182), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic negatively affected the manner of delivery, duration, and quality of service regarding wound management. During this period, face-to-face contact times with patients were reduced, some diagnosis and treatment attempts were not performed, and wound care services were suspended temporarily or permanently. On the other hand, a positive result was achieved in that the physicians and nurses gave positive feedback for the telehealth experience.

Impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on severe trauma trends and healthcare system reassessment in Lombardia, Italy: an analysis from the regional trauma registry.

BACKGROUNDS: The COVID-19 pandemic drastically strained the health systems worldwide, obligating the reassessment of how healthcare is delivered. In Lombardia, Italy, a Regional Emergency Committee (REC) was established and the regional health system reorganized, with only three hospitals designated as hubs for trauma care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of this reorganization of regional care, comparing the distribution of patients before and during the COVID-19 outbreak and to describe changes in the epidemiology of severe trauma among the two periods. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted using retrospectively collected data from the Regional Trauma Registry of Lombardia (LTR). We compared the data of trauma patients admitted to three hub hospitals before the COVID-19 outbreak (September 1 to November 19, 2019) with those recorded during the pandemic (February 21 to May 10, 2020) in the same hospitals. Demographic data, level of pre-hospital care (Advanced Life Support-ALS, Basic Life Support-BLS), type of transportation, mechanism of injury (MOI), abbreviated injury score (AIS, 1998 version), injury severity score (ISS), revised trauma score (RTS), and ICU admission and survival outcome of all the patients admitted to the three trauma centers designed as hubs, were reviewed. Screening for COVID-19 was performed with nasopharyngeal swabs, chest ultrasound, and/or computed tomography. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, trauma patients admitted to the hubs increased (46.4% vs 28.3%, p < 0.001) with an increase in pre-hospital time (71.8 vs 61.3 min, p < 0.01), while observed in hospital mortality was unaffected. TRISS, ISS, AIS, and ICU admission were similar in both periods. During the COVID-19 outbreak, we observed substantial changes in MOI of severe trauma patients admitted to three hubs, with increases of unintentional (31.9% vs 18.5%, p < 0.05) and intentional falls (8.4% vs 1.2%, p < 0.05), whereas the pandemic restrictions reduced road- related injuries (35.6% vs 60%, p < 0.05). Deaths on scene were significantly increased (17.7% vs 6.8%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 outbreak affected the epidemiology of severe trauma patients. An increase in trauma patient admissions to a few designated facilities with high level of care obtained satisfactory results, while COVID-19 patients overwhelmed resources of most other hospitals.