A Consensus-Based Criterion Standard for the Requirement of a Trauma Team.

BACKGROUND: Trauma team activation (TTA) represents a considerable expenditure of trauma centre resources. It is mainly triggered by field triage criteria. The overall quality of the criteria may be evaluated based on the rate of over- and undertriage. However, there is no gold standard that defines which adult patients truly require a trauma team. The objective of this study was to develop consensus-based criteria defining the necessity for a trauma team. METHODS: A consensus group was formed by trauma specialists experienced in emergency and trauma care with a specific interest in field triage and having previously participated in guideline development. A literature search was conducted to identify criteria that have already been used or suggested. The initial list of criteria was discussed in two Delphi round and two consensus conferences. The entire process of discussion and voting was highly standardized and extensively documented, resulting in a final list of criteria. RESULTS: Initially 95 criteria were identified. This was subsequently reduced to 20 final criteria to appropriately indicate the requirement for attendance of a trauma team. The criteria address aspects related to injury severity, admission to an intensive care unit, death within 24 h, need for specified invasive procedures, need for surgical and/or interventional radiological procedures, and abnormal vital signs within a defined time period. CONCLUSIONS: The selected criteria may be applied as a tool for research and quality control concerning TTA. However, future studies are necessary to further evaluate for possible redundancy in criteria that may allow for further reduction in criteria.

Evaluation of a standardized instrument for post hoc analysis of trauma-team-activation-criteria in 75,613 injured patients an analysis of the TraumaRegister DGU®.

INTRODUCTION: To improve the quality of criteria for trauma-team-activation it is necessary to identify patients who benefited from the treatment by a trauma team. Therefore, we evaluated a post hoc criteria catalogue for trauma-team-activation which was developed in a consensus process by an expert group and published recently. The objective was to examine whether the catalogue can identify patients that died after admission to the hospital and therefore can benefit from a specialized trauma team mostly. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The catalogue was applied to the data of 75,613 patients from the TraumaRegister DGU® between the 01/2007 and 12/2016 with a maximum abbreviated injury score (AIS) severity ≥ 2. The endpoint was hospital mortality, which was defined as death before discharge from acute care. RESULTS: The TraumaRegister DGU® dataset contains 18 of the 20 proposed criteria within the catalogue which identified 99.6% of the patients who were admitted to the trauma room following an accident and who died during their hospital stay. Moreover, our analysis showed that at least one criterion was fulfilled in 59,785 cases (79.1%). The average ISS in this group was 21.2 points (SD 9.9). None of the examined criteria applied to 15,828 cases (average ISS 8.6; SD 5). The number of consensus-based criteria correlated with the severity of injury and mortality. Of all deceased patients (8,451), only 31 (0.37%) could not be identified on the basis of the 18 examined criteria. Where only one criterion was fulfilled, mortality was 1.7%; with 2 or more criteria, mortality was at least 4.6%. DISCUSSION: The consensus-based criteria identified nearly all patients who died as a result of their injuries. If only one criterion was fulfilled, mortality was relatively low. However, it increased to almost 5% if two criteria were fulfilled. Further studies are necessary to analyse and examine the relative weighting of the various criteria. Our instrument is capable to identify severely injured patients with increased in-hospital mortality and injury severity. However, a minimum of two criteria needs to be fulfilled. Based on these findings, we conclude that the criteria list is useful for post hoc analysis of the quality of field triage in patients with severe injury.

Ribavirin priming in patients with chronic hepatitis C and normal ALT: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Ribavirin has favorable immune-modulating effects in patients with hepatitis C. Therefore, a ribavirin monotherapy preceding the combination of peginterferon plus ribavirin may be beneficial. We conducted a pilot study with a sequential regimen using a reduced dosage of peginterferon-alfa 2b in patients with chronic hepatitis C and normal transaminases. METHODOLOGY: Twenty patients (17 genotype 1, 3 genotype 2/3) were treated with ribavirin for 4 wk followed by ribavirin plus peginterferon-alfa 2b 100 microg for 4 wk and ribavirin plus peginterferon-alfa 2b 50 microg for 44 wk. TH1-cytokines interferon-gamma and interleukin-2, and TH2-cytokines interleukin-4 and interleukin-10 were measured in the supernatant from PHA-stimulated lymphocytes. RESULTS: Sustained viral response defined as negative HCV-RNA after follow up was 50%, 41%, and 100% for all patients, genotype 1, and genotype 2/3, resp. The increase in interferon-gamma following ribavirin monotherapy was significantly higher for patients with sustained viral response. CONCLUSIONS: The sustained viral response rate of this pilot study using ribavirin priming and reduced peginterferon dosage is in line with previous trials using standard treatment regimens for chronic hepatitis C. Our data stress the positive impact of the ribavirin-induced TH2-TH1 cytokine shift at least in patients with normal ALT. Larger clinical studies with ribavirin priming seem warranted.