Impact of an inpatient rehabilitation facility on functional outcome and length of stay of burn survivors.

This study reviewed the use of an inpatient rehabilitation unit for burn survivors. We hypothesized that adult burn patients admitted earlier to inpatient rehabilitation have an equal or better functional outcome than those remaining in acute burn center for rehabilitation care. Functional Independence Measure (FIM) data were prospectively collected on our burn center admissions dating January 2002 to August 2003. National rehabilitation data were acquired from eRehabData and burn literature. A total of 217 adult patients survived until hospital discharge, with 21 (9.7%) discharged to inpatient rehabilitation (REHAB). REHAB had larger burn injuries, more inhalation injuries, higher incidence hand/foot burns, and longer length of stay (LOS). REHAB had lower FIM upon rehabilitation facility admission than national averages but greater FIM improvement during comparable rehabilitation LOS. Although our earlier rehabilitation admission strategy results in more frequent rehabilitation unit referrals, patients had shorter burn center LOS and greater FIM improvement compared with limited national burn patient functional outcome data currently available.

Bronchoalveolar lavage in diagnosis of ventilator-associated pneumonia in patients with burns.

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality for patients with burns. In nonburn populations, bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) excludes other pathology such as systemic inflammatory response syndrome. We hypothesized that BAL would decrease our false-positive VAP rate. All ventilated patients with burn injury who were admitted to our institution from July 2000 through June 2003 were included. After June 2001, BAL was used to make the diagnosis of VAP, with > or =10(4) organisms considered a positive result. Fifty patients met criteria for VAP, 21 in the pre-BAL period and 29 in the BAL period. Six patients (21%) in the BAL group had quantitative cultures <10(4) and were not treated. The outcomes for these patients were not different than those treated for VAP. There were no differences in age, TBSA size, antibiotic use, or ventilator days for the pre-BAL or BAL groups, although the pneumonia rate was lower for the BAL time period. The use of BAL eliminated the unnecessary antibiotic treatment of 21% of patients in the BAL time period and was associated with a lower rate of VAP.

Blunt splenic injury: operation versus angiographic embolization.

BACKGROUND: Splenic injuries, like other blunt traumatic injuries, are increasingly treated with non-operative management. Angiographic embolization (AE) has emerged as an alternative modality for treatment of splenic injuries. We hypothesized that splenic embolization would lead to equivalent, if not improved, outcomes in terms of mortality, total costs, complications, and duration of stay. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospective data set was performed for all adult splenic injuries admitted to our level I trauma center from 2000 through 2003. Demographics, number of red cell units, emergency department hemodynamics, costs, and outcomes were examined. The operative group included those who underwent computed tomography (CT) first then went to the operating room (OR) (CT+OR) or those who went directly to the OR. RESULTS: There were 25 CT+OR and 24 AE patients of 164 blunt splenic injuries. After univariate analysis, higher injury severity score (ISS), lower systolic blood pressure, lower pH, and higher packed red blood cell transfusions were associated with increased mortality and duration of stay. The splenic Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS; mean +/- SD) was the same for AE compared to CT+OR patients (3.8 +/- 0.4 vs 3.5 +/- 0.9). Although the AE group was older (50 +/- 20 vs 36 +/- 13 years, P < .01), Glasgow Comma Score (13 +/- 4 vs 11 +/- 5), age, highest heart rate (109 +/- 24 vs 120 +/- 43), and splenic AIS were not predictive of the need for an operation. Abdominal complications were lower in the AE group compared to the CT+OR (13% vs 29%), but mortality was not different (8% vs 4%). Total costs were similar for both groups after adjustment for ISS, GCS, pH, pretreatment transfusions, and spleen AIS (AE, $49,300 +/- $40,460 vs CT+OR, $54,590 +/- $34,760). The non-operative failure rate in this study was 2%. CONCLUSIONS: AE of splenic injuries is safe and associated with fewer complications. The spleen AIS, heart rate, age, and GCS did not correlate with the need for an operation. Higher ISS, lower blood pressure, lower pH, and increased number of packed red blood cell transfusions were better indicators of the need for an operation versus embolization.

Normal D-dimer levels do not exclude thrombotic complications in trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) are common complications in trauma patients. These diagnoses can be difficult and expensive to make. Recent studies report that a negative D-dimer test excludes thrombotic complications. We questioned the predictive value of a D-dimer test to exclude DVT and PE. METHODS: Adult trauma patients admitted March 1999 to March 2001, with an Injury Severity Score > or =9 and expected length of stay >3 days, were approached for enrollment. Bilateral lower extremity duplex ultrasounds and d-dimer levels were performed within 36 hours of admission, day 3-4, day 7, and weekly until discharge. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were diagnosed with DVTs, with 18 DVTs detected within the first week of admission. Five DVT patients had normal D-dimer levels. One of three PE patients tested had a normal D-dimer level. The false negative rate for DVT by d-dimer assay was 24%, and the sensitivity was 76%. The negative predictive value for D-dimers was 92%. All false negative d-dimer tests occurred in patients diagnosed with DVT or PE within the 4 days after admission. CONCLUSION: In the early postinjury phase, a negative d-dimer test does not exclude DVT or PE. However, the negative predictive value of a D-dimer test after the first 4 days from admission rose to 100%. Patients with clinical signs and symptoms of DVT or PE in the immediate postinjury phase should undergo further screening to exclude thromboembolic complications.

Burn centers should be involved in prevention of occupational electrical injuries.

Electrical injuries are uncommon, comprising 10% of our regional burn center admissions during a 9-year period. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence, type, and location of occupation-related electrical injuries in an attempt to focus our injury prevention and outreach efforts. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with electrical injuries admitted to our burn center from January 1992 through March 2000, with focused analysis on those patients admitted with occupation-related electrical injuries. Of the 95 patients admitted for electrical burns, 81% (n = 77) were occupational injuries. This rate of injury suggests that prevention efforts should be directed at work sites and partnerships should be developed between burn centers and businesses to reduce the incidence of injuries.

Trends in burn resuscitation: shifting the focus from fluids to adequate endpoint monitoring, edema control, and adjuvant therapies.

Bum shock is a complex process involving a series of intertwined physiologic responses to injury that require more rigorous intervention than simply a change in fluid tonicity, fluid composition, or fluid resuscitation volume. Controversy ensues over monitoring techniques and resuscitation goals, in part because the identification of true markers of perfusion is clouded by intradependence of endpoints on other metabolic processes. The persistence of cellular hypoperfusion in patients who have been deemed adequately resuscitated by global indices supports the growing realization that failure of conventional endpoint-monitoring strategies to detect compensated bum shock can lead to significant organ injury from SIRS or MODS. Current endpoints should be interpreted in the aggregate, because none have yet been demonstrated to reflect tissue perfusion status independently and accurately. Numerous technologically advanced endpoints to predict patient outcome, which may be useful in determining futility of treatment or end-of-life decisions, are now available. Still lack-ing, however, is a reliable tool proven to improve outcome that can guide bum shock resuscitation therapies successfully. Exciting new research in tissue oxygenation and perfusion has revealed that damaging mediator cascades and irreversible microvascular changes may preclude complete resolution of bum shock solely through restoration of oxygen delivery. Because bum patients now frequently survive the early resuscitation phase. the focus should be on controlling derangements in oxygen use and correcting occult hypoperfusion to reduce later adverse patient outcomes from SIRS, sepsis, and MODS. Bum-specific research on resuscitation endpoints and monitoring strategies lags behind research in other patient populations. Present standards and monitoring guidelines for bum shock resuscitation should be critically evaluated and based on true, scientifically validated data rather than on observational studies or personal beliefs. Thus the continuing challenge for clinicians and researchers:burn centers must collaborate to perform large, multi-center studies to evaluate critically and to prove resuscitation endpoints and therapies. Future technologies targeted at microcirculatory perfusion and cellular oxygenation offer an exciting promise for less invasive, easily accessible, more accurate endpoints and treatments for bum shock resuscitation.

Beta-blocker use is associated with improved outcomes in adult trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Beta-adrenoreceptor blocker (beta-blocker) therapy may improve outcomes in surgical patients by decreasing cardiac oxygen consumption and hypermetabolism. Because beta-blockers can lower the systemic blood pressure and cerebral perfusion pressure, there is concern regarding their use in patients with head injury. However, beta-blockers may protect beta-receptor rich brain cells by attenuating cerebral oxygen consumption and metabolism. We hypothesized that beta-blockers are safe in trauma patients, even if they have suffered a significant head injury. METHODS: Using pharmacy and trauma registry data of a Level I trauma center, we identified a cohort of trauma patients who received beta-blockers during their hospital stay (beta-cohort). Trauma admissions who did not receive beta-blockers were in the control cohort. beta-blocker status, in combination with other variables associated with mortality, were placed in a stepwise multivariate logistic regression to identify independent predictors of fatal outcome. RESULTS: In all, 303 (7%) of 4,117 trauma patients received beta-blockers. In the beta-cohort, 45% of patients were on beta-blockers preinjury. The most common reason to initiate beta-blocker therapy was blood pressure (60%) and heart rate (20%) control. The overall mortality rate was 5.6% and head injury was considered to be the major cause of death. After adjusting for age, Injury Severity Scale score, blood pressure, Glasgow Coma Scale score, respiratory status, and mechanism of injury, the odds ratio for fatal outcome was 0.3 (p < 0.001) for beta-cohort as compared with control. Decreased risk of fatal outcome was more pronounced in patients with a significant head injury. CONCLUSIONS: beta-blocker therapy is safe and may be beneficial in selected trauma patients with or without head injury. Further studies looking at beta-blocker therapy in trauma patients and their effect on cerebral metabolism are warranted.

The need for early angiographic embolization in blunt liver injuries.

BACKGROUND: Although nonoperative management of blunt liver injury (BLI) has become standard practice, adjuncts to nonoperative therapy, such as angiographic embolization, have not been well characterized. METHODS: Patients with BLI were retrospectively identified at our American College of Surgeons-verified Level I trauma center from January 1997 through February 2001. Patients were stratified into four groups: those who received angiographic embolization (AE) as an early intervention when BLI was initially diagnosed (EARLY-AE); those who underwent AE after liver-related operation or later in the hospital course (LATE-AE); those treated with operation only (OR-ONLY); and nonoperative patients who also did not undergo AE (NO-OR). RESULTS: There were 126 patients with BLI, of whom 94 were NO-OR, 20 were OR-ONLY, 6 had LATE-AE, and 6 had EARLY-AE. The NO-OR group had significantly lower liver Abbreviated Injury Scale scores. Liver Abbreviated Injury Scale scores were not different between the EARLY-AE, LATE-AE, and OR-ONLY groups. Liver-related mortality was not lower for those treated with AE. There was a trend toward lower mortality for just the EARLY-AE group compared with the LATE-AE and OR-ONLY groups (0% vs. 50% and 35%). The number of units of packed red blood cells transfused and the number of liver-related operations were lower in the EARLY-AE compared with the LATE-AE group, but liver-related complications were not different between the EARLY-AE, LATE-AE, or OR-ONLY groups. AE was successful in arresting hemorrhage in 83% of the cases. CONCLUSION: In this small series, we observed similar morbidity and mortality with AE compared with operative therapy. EARLY-AE did decrease blood use and the number of liver-related operations. AE can be performed on severely injured patients with comparable liver-related mortality and complications. Further study of the timing of and outcomes from AE is needed.

Hospital cost is reduced by motorcycle helmet use.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to identify the impact of motorcycle helmet use on patient outcomes and cost of hospitalization, in a state with a mandatory helmet law. METHODS: Patients admitted after motorcycle crashes from July 1996 to October 2000 were reviewed, including demographics, Injury Severity Score, length of stay, injuries, outcome, helmet use, hospital cost data, and insurance information. Statistical analysis was performed comparing helmeted to unhelmeted patients using analysis of variance, Student's test, and regression analysis. RESULTS: We admitted 216 patients: 174 wore helmets and 42 did not. Injury Severity Score correlated with both length of stay and cost of hospitalization. Mortality was not significantly different in either group. Failure to wear a helmet significantly increased incidence of head injuries (Student's test, p < 0.02), but not other injuries. Helmet use decreased mean cost of hospitalization by more than $6,000 per patient. CONCLUSION: Failure to wear a helmet adds to the financial burden created by motorcycle-related injuries. Therefore, individuals who do not wear helmets should pay higher insurance premiums.

Beta-blocker use is associated with improved outcomes in adult burn patients.

BACKGROUND: There is no direct evidence that beta-blockers improve mortality in burn victims. Beta-blockers attenuate hypermetabolic states in burned children, and perioperative use in elective adult cases has beneficial effects, which suggests that beta-blockers may also improve burn outcomes. However, beta-blockers decrease cardiac output and may decrease oxygen delivery, and theoretically may increase mortality. What is the effect of beta-blockers on healing time and mortality in burn patients? METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study. We identified three cohorts of adult burn patients between 1996 and 2001: all who were on beta-blockers (BB) before their injury (PMH BB); all who were initiated on BB during their hospitalization for management of hypertension or tachyarrhythmia (HOSP BB); and control, who were never treated with beta-blockers. For each patient in the PMH BB and HOSP BB groups, two patients were placed in the control cohort by matching age and total body surface area burn. Premorbid conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, cardiac disease, renal insufficiency, and diuretic and calcium channel blocker use were analyzed. Multivariate regression models were used to identify independent modifiers. RESULTS: There were 21 PMH BB, 22 HOSP BB, and 86 control patients. All PMH BB patients remained on their BB regimen in the hospital. HOSP BB patients were initiated on beta-blockers at a mean of 8.8 days postinjury. There were no differences in age (mean, 58 +/- 17 years), total body surface area burned (mean, 14 +/- 12%), or mechanism of injury among the cohorts. The mortality rate was 5% for the PMH BB cohort, 27% for the HOSP BB cohort, and 13% for controls. The mean healing times were 51 +/- 29 days for PMH BB patients, 79 +/- 54 days for HOSP BB patients, and 60 +/- 39 for controls. In multivariate analyses, PMH BB was associated with a significant decrease in fatal outcome and healing time (p < or = 0.05 compared with control). CONCLUSION: Beta-blockers have the potential to improve adult burn outcomes. Postinjury treatment should be studied in a randomized, clinical trial.

Does bronchoalveolar lavage enhance our ability to treat ventilator-associated pneumonia in a trauma-burn intensive care unit?

BACKGROUND: Recent literature supports the notion that bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) in ventilated trauma patients may improve our ability to diagnose and treat ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). We hypothesized that BAL would decrease the number of cases of VAP diagnosed and impact our antibiotic use and ventilator days. METHODS: Prospective data on all infectious complications were collected for patients admitted to the trauma-burn service for the year 2001. All VAPs between January 1, 2001, through June 30, 2001, were diagnosed without BAL (No BAL group) using clinical signs of fever, sputum production, leukocytosis, chest radiographs, and sputum culture. After July 1, 2001, VAP was diagnosed with the use of BAL. RESULTS: There were 37 cases of VAP in the No BAL group (11%) and 29 cases of VAP (8%) in the BAL group. There were no statistical differences in Injury Severity Score, hospital length of stay, ventilator days, or mortality between the two groups. The time to initial treatment of VAP was shorter for the BAL group, but did not reach significance. The number of patients who had their VAP pathogens correctly treated with empiric antibiotics was also the same between the two groups. There was no difference in the rate of recurrent pneumonias. The antibiotic costs and respiratory therapy/ventilator costs were not statistically different between the groups for trauma patients, although antibiotic costs were higher for burn patients. CONCLUSION: The routine use of BAL to diagnose VAP in our mixed trauma-burn population did not impact on clinical outcomes or antibiotic use. Our results do not justify the additional costs and potential risks of BAL for all patients. The means of VAP diagnosis may not be as important as choosing the appropriate antibiotics for common VAP organisms in any given intensive care unit.