Ketamine For Acute Pain After Trauma (KAPT): A Pragmatic, Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Non-narcotic intravenous medications may be a beneficial adjunct to oral multimodal pain regimens (MMPRs) which reduce but do not eliminate opioid exposure and prescribing after trauma. We hypothesized that the addition of a sub-dissociative ketamine infusion (KI) to a standardized oral MMPR reduces inpatient opioid exposure. METHODS: Eligible adult trauma patients admitted to the intermediate or intensive care unit were randomized upon admission to our institutional MMPR per usual care (UC) or UC plus sub-dissociative KI for 24 to 72 hours after arrival. The primary outcome was morphine milligram equivalents per day (MME/d) and secondary outcomes included total MME, discharge with an opioid prescription (OP%), and rates of ketamine side effects. Bayesian posterior probabilities (pp) were calculated using neutral priors. RESULTS: A total of 300 patients were included in the final analysis with 144 randomized to KI and 156 to UC. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The injury severity scores for KI were 19 [14, 29] versus UC 22 [14, 29]. The KI group had a lower rate of long-bone fracture (37% versus 49%) and laparotomy (16% versus 24%). Patients receiving KI had an absolute reduction of 7 MME/day, 96 total MME, and 5% in OP%. Additionally, KI had a relative risk (RR) reduction of 19% in MME/day (RR 0.81 [0.69 - 0.95], pp = 99%), 20% in total MME (RR 0.80 [0.64, 0.99], pp = 98%), and 8% in OP% (RR 0.92 [0.76, 1.11], pp = 81%). The KI group had a higher rate of delirium (11% versus 6%); however, rates of other side effects such as arrythmias and unplanned intubations were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Addition of a sub-dissociative ketamine infusion to an oral MMPR resulted in a decrease in opioid exposure in severely injured patients. Sub-dissociative ketamine infusions can be used as a safe adjunct to decrease opioid exposure in monitored settings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I; Therapeutic/Care Management.

Opioid Risk Tool, in-hospital opioid exposure, and opioid demand predict pain outcomes following traumatic injury.

Prescribed opioids are a mainstay pain treatment after traumatic injury, but a subgroup of patients may be at risk for continued opioid use. We evaluated the predictive utility of a traditional screening tool, the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT), and two other measures: average in-hospital milligram morphine equivalents (MME) per day and an assessment of opioid demand in predicting pain outcomes. Assessments of pain-related outcomes (pain intensity, interference, injury-related stress, and need for additional pain treatment) were administered at 2 weeks and 12 months post-discharge in a sample of 34 patients hospitalized for traumatic injury. Bayesian linear models were used to evaluate changes in responses over time as a function of predictors. High-risk ORT, higher MME per day, and greater opioid demand predicted less change in outcomes over time. This report provides first evidence that malleable factors of opioid and opioid demand have utility in predicting pain outcomes following traumatic injury.

Identifying Age-Specific Risk Factors for Poor Outcomes After Trauma With Machine Learning.

INTRODUCTION: Risk stratification for poor outcomes is not currently age-specific. Risk stratification of older patients based on observational cohorts primarily composed of young patients may result in suboptimal clinical care and inaccurate quality benchmarking. We assessed two hypotheses. First, we hypothesized that risk factors for poor outcomes after trauma are age-dependent and, second, that the relative importance of various risk factors are also age-dependent. METHODS: A cohort study of severely injured adult trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit 2014-2018 was performed using trauma registry data. Random forest algorithms predicting poor outcomes (death or complication) were built and validated using three cohorts: (1) patients of all ages, (2) younger patients, and (3) older patients. Older patients were defined as aged 55 y or more to maintain consistency with prior trauma literature. Complications assessed included acute renal failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiac arrest, unplanned intubation, unplanned intensive care unit admission, and unplanned return to the operating room, as defined by the trauma quality improvement program. Mean decrease in model accuracy (MDA), if each variable was removed and scaled to a Z-score, was calculated. MDA change ≥4 standard deviations between age cohorts was considered significant. RESULTS: Of 5489 patients, 25% were older. Poor outcomes occurred in 12% of younger and 33% of older patients. Head injury was the most important predictor of poor outcome in all cohorts. In the full cohort, age was the most important predictor of poor outcomes after head injury. Within age cohorts, the most important predictors of poor outcomes, after head injury, were surgery requirement in younger patients and arrival Glasgow Coma Scale in older patients. Compared to younger patients, head injury and arrival Glasgow Coma Scale had the greatest increase in importance for older patients, while systolic blood pressure had the greatest decrease in importance. CONCLUSIONS: Supervised machine learning identified differences in risk factors and their relative associations with poor outcomes based on age. Age-specific models may improve hospital benchmarking and identify quality improvement targets for older trauma patients.

Impact of Intra-Operative Shock and Resuscitation on Surgical Site Infections After Trauma Laparotomy.

Background: Patients undergoing trauma laparotomy experience high rates of surgical site infection (SSI). Although intra-operative shock is a likely contributor to SSI risk, little is known about the relation between shock, intra-operative restoration of physiologic normalcy, and SSI development. Patients and Methods: A retrospective review of trauma patients who underwent emergent definitive laparotomy was performed. Using shock index and base excess at the beginning and end of laparotomy, patients were classified as normal, persistent shock, resuscitated, or new shock. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify predictors of organ/space SSI, superficial/deep SSI, and any SSI. Results: Of 1,191 included patients, 600 (50%) were categorized as no shock, 248 (21%) as resuscitated, 109 (9%) as new shock, and 236 (20%) as persistent shock, with incidence of any SSI as 51 (9%), 28 (11%), 26 (24%), and 32 (14%), respectively. These rates were similar in organ/space and superficial/deep SSIs. On multivariable analysis, resuscitated, new shock, and persistent shock were associated with increased odds of organ/space SSI (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-3.5; p < 0.001) and any SSI (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-3.2; p < 0.001), but no increased risk of superficial/deep SSI (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.8-2.6; p = 0.331). Conclusions: Although the trajectory of physiologic status influenced SSI, the presence of shock at any time during trauma laparotomy, regardless of restoration of physiologic normalcy, was associated with increased odds of SSI. Further investigation is warranted to determine the relation between peri-operative shock and SSI in trauma patients.

Acute pain management after trauma: What you need to know.

ABSTRACT: Effective acute pain control is mandatory after injury. Opioids continue to be a pillar acute pain management of strategies despite not being as effective as some nonnarcotic alternatives. An acute pain management strategy after trauma should be thoughtful, effective, and responsible. A thoughtful approach includes managing a patient's expectations for acute pain control and ensuring that interventions purposefully and rationally affect the domain of pain that is uncontrolled. An effective pain management strategy includes a multimodal approach using acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and regional anesthesia. A responsible acute pain management approach includes knowing the relative strengths of the opioids prescribed and standardized approach to opioid prescribing at discharge to minimize diversion. Acute pain management is quite understudied, and future considerations include a reliable objective measurement of pain and the evaluation of nonmedication acute pain interventions.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Severe Abdominal Trauma: A Secondary Analysis of the Damage Control Laparotomy Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following abdominal trauma. We hypothesized that patients undergoing definitive laparotomy (DEF) would have better PROs compared to those treated with damage control laparotomy (DCL). METHODS: The DCL Trial randomized DEF versus DCL in abdominal trauma. PROs were measured using the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D) questionnaire at discharge and six months postdischarge (1 = perfect health, 0 = death, and <0 = worse than death) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist-Civilian. Unadjusted Bayesian analysis with a neutral prior was used to assess the posterior probability of achieving minimal clinically important difference. RESULTS: Of 39 randomized patients (21 DEF versus 18 DCL), 8 patients died (7 DEF versus 1 DCL). Of those who survived, 28 completed the EQ-5D at discharge (12 DEF versus 16 DCL) and 25 at 6 mo (12 DEF versus 13 DCL). Most patients were male (79%) with a median age of 30 (interquartile range (IQR) 21-42), suffered blunt injury (56%), and were severely injured (median injury severity score 33, IQR 21 - 42). Median EQ-5D value at discharge was 0.20 (IQR 0.06 - 0.52) DEF versus 0.31 (IQR -0.03 - 0.43) DCL, and at six months 0.51 (IQR 0.30 - 0.74) DEF versus 0.50 (IQR 0.28 - 0.84) DCL. The posterior probability of minimal clinically important difference DEF versus DCL at discharge and six months was 16% and 23%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Functional deficits for trauma patients persist beyond the acute setting regardless of laparotomy status. These deficits warrant longitudinal studies to better inform patients on recovery expectations.

An opioid-minimizing multimodal pain regimen reduces opioid exposure and pain in trauma-injured patients at high risk for opioid misuse: Secondary analysis from the mast trial.

BACKGROUND: Screening to identify patients at risk for opioid misuse after trauma is recommended but not commonly used to guide perioperative opioid management interventions. The Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma trial demonstrated that an opioid-minimizing multimodal pain regimen reduced opioid exposure in a heterogeneous trauma patient population. Here, we assess the efficacy of the Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma multimodal pain regimen in a critical patient subgroup who screened at high risk for opioid misuse. METHODS: The Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma trial compared an opioid-minimizing multimodal pain regimen (oral acetaminophen, naproxen, gabapentin, lidocaine patch, as-needed opioid) against an original multimodal pain regimen (intravenous followed by oral acetaminophen, 48-hour celecoxib and pregabalin, followed by naproxen and gabapentin, scheduled tramadol, as-needed opioid), in a randomized trial conducted from April 2018 to March 2019. A total of 631 enrolled patients were classified either as low- or high-risk via the Opioid Risk Tool. Bayesian analyses evaluated the moderating influence of Opioid Risk Tool risk (high/low) on the effect of Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma multimodal pain regimen (versus original) on opioid exposure (morphine milligram equivalents/day), opioids prescribed at discharge, and pain scores. RESULTS: Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma multimodal pain regimen effectively reduced morphine milligram equivalents/day in low- and high-Opioid Risk Tool risk groups. Moderation was observed for opioids at discharge and pain scores; Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma multimodal pain regimen was effective in the high-risk group only (opioids at discharge: 63% vs 77%, relative risk = 0.86, 95% Bayesian credible interval [0.66-1.08], posterior probability (relative risk <1) = 90%; pain scores: b = 3.8, 95% Bayesian credible interval [3.2-4.4] vs b = 4.0, 95% Bayesian credible interval [3.4-4.6], posterior probability (b <0) = 87%). CONCLUSION: This study is the first to show the moderating influence of opioid misuse risk on the effectiveness of an opioid-minimizing multimodal pain regimen. The Opioid Risk Tool was useful in identifying high-risk patients for whom the Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma multimodal pain regimen is recommended for perioperative pain management.

Are trauma surgeons prepared? A survey of trauma surgeons' disaster preparedness before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: US trauma centers (TCs) must remain prepared for mass casualty incidents (MCIs). However, trauma surgeons may lack formal MCI training. The recent COVID-19 pandemic drove multiple patient surges, overloaded Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies, and stressed TCs. This survey assessed trauma surgeons' MCI training, experience, and system and personal preparedness before the pandemic compared with the pandemic's third year. Methods: Survey invitations were emailed to all 1544 members of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma in 2019, and then resent in 2022 to 1575 members with additional questions regarding the pandemic. Questions assessed practice type, TC characteristics, training, experience, beliefs about personal and hospital preparedness, likelihood of MCI scenarios, interventions desired from membership organizations, and pandemic experiences. Results: The response rate was 16.7% in 2019 and 12% in 2022. In 2022, surgeons felt better prepared than their hospitals for pandemic care, mass shootings, and active shooters, but remained feeling less well prepared for cyberattack and hazardous material events, compared with 2019. Only 35% of the respondents had unintentional MCI response experience in 2019 or 2022, and even fewer had experience with intentional MCI. 78% had completed a Stop the Bleed (STB) course and 63% own an STB kit. 57% had engaged in family preparedness activities; less than 40% had a family action plan if they could not come home during an MCI. 100% of the respondents witnessed pandemic-related adverse events, including colleague and coworker illness, patient surges, and resource limitations, and 17% faced colleague or coworker death. Conclusions: Trauma surgeons thought that they became better at pandemic care and rated themselves as better prepared than their hospitals for MCI care, which is an opportunity for them to take greater leadership roles. Opportunities remain to improve surgeons' family and personal MCI preparedness. Surgeons' most desired professional organization interventions include advocacy, national standards for TC preparedness, and online training. Level of evidence: VII, survey of expert opinion.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Surgical Rib Fixation to Nonoperative Management in Severe Chest Wall Injury.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRFs) to nonoperative management in severe chest wall injury. BACKGROUND: SSRF has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with clinical flail chest and respiratory failure. However, the effect of SSRF outcomes in severe chest wall injuries without clinical flail chest is unknown. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial comparing SSRF to nonoperative management in severe chest wall injury, defined as: (1) a radiographic flail segment without clinical flail or (2) ≥5 consecutive rib fractures or (3) any rib fracture with bicortical displacement. Randomization was stratified by the unit of admission as a proxy for injury severity. Primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, ventilator days, opioid exposure, mortality, and incidences of pneumonia and tracheostomy. Quality of life at 1, 3, and 6 months was measured using the EQ-5D-5L survey. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were randomized in an intention-to-treat analysis (usual care = 42, SSRF = 42). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The numbers of total fractures, displaced fractures, and segmental fractures per patient were also similar, as were the incidences of displaced fractures and radiographic flail segments. Hospital LOS was greater in the SSRF group. ICU LOS and ventilator days were similar. After adjusting for the stratification variable, hospital LOS remained greater in the SSRF group (RR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.17-1.88). ICU LOS (RR: 1.65, 95% CI: 0.94-2.92) and ventilator days (RR: 1.49, 95% CI: 0.61--3.69) remained similar. Subgroup analysis showed that patients with displaced fractures were more likely to have LOS outcomes similar to their usual care counterparts. At 1 month, SSRF patients had greater impairment in mobility [3 (2-3) vs 2 (1-2), P = 0.012] and self-care [2 (1-2) vs 2 (2-3), P = 0.034] dimensions of the EQ-5D-5L. CONCLUSIONS: In severe chest wall injury, even in the absence of clinical flail chest, the majority of patients still reported moderate to extreme pain and impairment of usual physical activity at one month. SSRF increased hospital LOS and did not provide any quality of life benefit for up to 6 months.

Dysphagia is associated with worse clinical outcomes in geriatric trauma patients.

Introduction: Dysphagia is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and resource utilization in hospitalized patients, but studies on outcomes in geriatric trauma patients with dysphagia are limited. We hypothesized that geriatric trauma patients with dysphagia would have worse clinical outcomes compared with those without dysphagia. Methods: Patients with and without dysphagia were compared in a single-center retrospective cohort study of trauma patients aged ≥65 years admitted in 2019. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, discharge destination, and unplanned ICU admission. Multivariable regression analyses and Bayesian analyses adjusted for age, Injury Severity Score, mechanism of injury, and gender were performed to determine the association between dysphagia and clinical outcomes. Results: Of 1706 geriatric patients, 69 patients (4%) were diagnosed with dysphagia. Patients with dysphagia were older with a higher Injury Severity Score. Increased odds of mortality did not reach statistical significance (OR 1.6, 95% CI 0.6 to 3.4, p=0.30). Dysphagia was associated with increased odds of unplanned ICU admission (OR 4.6, 95% CI 2.0 to 9.6, p≤0.001) and non-home discharge (OR 5.2, 95% CI 2.4 to 13.9, p≤0.001), as well as increased ICU LOS (OR 4.9, 95% CI 3.1 to 8.1, p≤0.001), and hospital LOS (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.7 to 2.6, p≤0.001). On Bayesian analysis, dysphagia was associated with an increased probability of longer hospital and ICU LOS, unplanned ICU admission, and non-home discharge. Conclusions: Clinically apparent dysphagia is associated with poor outcomes, but it remains unclear if dysphagia represents a modifiable risk factor or a marker of underlying frailty, leading to poor outcomes. This study highlights the importance of screening protocols for dysphagia in geriatric trauma patients to possibly mitigate adverse outcomes. Level of evidence: Level III.

Ketamine for acute pain after trauma: the KAPT randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for effective pain management and opioid minimization of intravenous ketamine in elective surgery has been extrapolated to acutely injured patients, despite limited supporting evidence in this population. This trial seeks to determine the effectiveness of the addition of sub-dissociative ketamine to a pill-based, opioid-minimizing multi-modal pain regimen (MMPR) for post traumatic pain. METHODS: This is a single-center, parallel-group, randomized, controlled comparative effectiveness trial comparing a MMPR to a MMPR plus a sub-dissociative ketamine infusion. All trauma patients 16 years and older admitted following a trauma which require intermediate (IMU) or intensive care unit (ICU) level of care are eligible. Prisoners, patients who are pregnant, patients not expected to survive, and those with contraindications to ketamine are excluded from this study. The primary outcome is opioid use, measured by morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per patient per day (MME/patient/day). The secondary outcomes include total MME, pain scores, morbidity, lengths of stay, opioid prescriptions at discharge, and patient centered outcomes at discharge and 6 months. DISCUSSION: This trial will determine the effectiveness of sub-dissociative ketamine infusion as part of a MMPR in reducing in-hospital opioid exposure in adult trauma patients. Furthermore, it will inform decisions regarding acute pain strategies on patient centered outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Ketamine for Acute Pain Management After Trauma (KAPT) with registration # NCT04129086 was registered on October 16, 2019.

Early pain, stress, and opioid use following traumatic injury.

OBJECTIVE: Prescription opioids are an effective pain treatment strategy but can lead to long-term opioid misuse. Identifying at risk patients during hospitalization can inform the development of prevention interventions post-discharge. Using the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT) as a screening measure, this study predicted factors associated with pain and opioid use at 2 weeks post-discharge in trauma patients. DESIGN: A quality improvement prospective study design was used. SETTING: Participant recruitment took place at an inpatient Level 1 trauma center in Houston, Texas. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (n = 103) were patients admitted to the adult trauma service. Patients completed the ORT in the hospital and a survey at 2 weeks post-discharge. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The survey assessed pain intensity and interference, injury-related stress, medication use, and need for additional pain treatment. Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney U test, the Spearman rank-order correlation, and chisquare test of independence tested the ORT as a predictor of follow-up outcomes. Post hoc analyses relied on logistic and quantile regression. RESULTS: The ORT identified 15.5 percent of patients at high risk for opioid-related aberrant behavior. Survey results indicated high percentages of patients reporting moderate to severe pain (79.6 percent), pain interference (77.9 percent), taking pain pills (59.6 percent), experiencing stress (76.9 percent), and needing pain treatment (52.4 percent). The ORT predicted injury-related stress with the high-risk category having higher stress levels than low risk (Z = 2.518, p = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Risk of opioid misuse assessed in hospitalized trauma patients was associated with injury-related stress reported post-discharge. This highlights the importance of including stress assessments in follow-up appointments.

Procainamide for shockable rhythm cardiac arrest in the Resuscitation Outcome Consortium.

BACKGROUND: With recent negative studies of amiodarone and lidocaine for cardiac arrest, research into other antiarrhythmics is warranted. Literature on procainamide in cardiac arrest is limited. We evaluated procainamide for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC). METHODS: We included all ROC Epistry 3 OHCAs with an initial shockable rhythm that received an antiarrhythmic. We stratified cases by antiarrhythmic: procainamide, amiodarone, or lidocaine. The outcomes were prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), ROSC in the ED, and survival to hospital discharge. We defined propensity scores based on possible confounders utilizing 1:1 propensity score matching to compare procainamide to amiodarone and lidocaine. We analyzed the matched data using logistic regression. We also used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between antiarrhythmic and outcomes. RESULTS: 3087 subjects met inclusion criteria; 51 patients received only procainamide, 1776 received amiodarone, and 1418 received lidocaine. On propensity score analysis and compared to procainamide, amiodarone had similar prehospital ROSC (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.3-1.8), ED ROSC (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.3), and survival (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.3-3.1). Lidocaine also had a similar prehospital ROSC (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.4-2.2), ED ROSC (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.5-2.7), and survival (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.5-4.0). However, using multivariable regression, amiodarone had lower prehospital ROSC than procainamide (aOR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.6). CONCLUSIONS: While associated with increased prehospital ROSC when compared with amiodarone using multivariable regression, procainamide otherwise had similar prehospital ROSC, ED ROSC, and survival. The role of procainamide in OHCA remains unclear.

The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index as a predictor of complications in geriatric trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is associated with increased morbidity and mortality after trauma. The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) is a validated scoring system used to predict the risk of complications related to malnutrition in nontrauma patients. We hypothesized that GNRI is predictive of worse outcomes in geriatric trauma patients. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study of trauma patients 65 years or older admitted in 2019. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index was calculated based on admission albumin level and ratio of actual body weight to ideal body weight. Groups were defined as major risk (GNRI <82), moderate risk (GNRI 82-91), low risk (GNRI 92-98), and no risk (GNRI >98). The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included ventilator days, intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, discharge home, sepsis, pneumonia, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the association between GNRI risk category and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 513 patients were identified for analysis. Median age was 78 years (71-86 years); 24 patients (4.7%) were identified as major risk, 66 (12.9%) as moderate risk, 72 (14%) as low risk, and 351 (68.4%) as no risk. Injury Severity Scores and Charlson Comorbidity Indexes were similar between all groups. Patients in the no risk group had decreased rates of death, and after adjusting for Injury Severity Score, age, and Charlson Comorbidity Index, the no risk group had decreased odds of death (odds ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.41) compared with the major risk group. The no risk group also had fewer infectious complications including sepsis and pneumonia, and shorter hospital LOS and were more likely to be discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: Major GNRI risk is associated with increased mortality and infectious complications in geriatric trauma patients. Further studies should target interventional strategies for those at highest risk based on GNRI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.

A core outcome set for damage control laparotomy via modified Delphi method.

OBJECTIVES: Damage control laparotomy (DCL) remains an important tool in the trauma surgeon's armamentarium. Inconsistency in reporting standards have hindered careful scrutiny of DCL outcomes. We sought to develop a core outcome set (COS) for DCL clinical studies to facilitate future pooling of data via meta-analysis and Bayesian statistics while minimizing reporting bias. METHODS: A modified Delphi study was performed using DCL content experts identified through Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) 'landmark' DCL papers and EAST ad hoc COS task force consensus. RESULTS: Of 28 content experts identified, 20 (71%) participated in round 1, 20/20 (100%) in round 2, and 19/20 (95%) in round 3. Round 1 identified 36 potential COS. Round 2 achieved consensus on 10 core outcomes: mortality, 30-day mortality, fascial closure, days to fascial closure, abdominal complications, major complications requiring reoperation or unplanned re-exploration following closure, gastrointestinal anastomotic leak, secondary intra-abdominal sepsis (including anastomotic leak), enterocutaneous fistula, and 12-month functional outcome. Despite feedback provided between rounds, round 3 achieved no further consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Through an electronic survey-based consensus method, content experts agreed on a core outcome set for damage control laparotomy, which is recommended for future trials in DCL clinical research. Further work is necessary to delineate specific tools and methods for measuring specific outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V, criteria.

Utility of a brief assessment of opioid demand among post-discharge trauma care patients.

Opioid misuse and opioid-related death are a growing public health concern. One population of interest is recent trauma and/or surgery patients, who are at increased risk of developing an opioid use disorder (OUD). Although a variety of assessments have been developed to screen for risk of opioid misuse, each has limitations and prediction needs improvement. One promising measure is drug demand, a behavioral economic measure assessing drug consumption at different price points. In the current proposal, we assessed the utility of a brief assessment of opioid demand. Demand and various pain-related self-report measures among trauma-surgery patients (N = 103) were assessed at 4 weeks post-discharge. Opioid demand was significantly associated with self-report measures of pain and amount of morphine milligram equivalents (MME) received during the hospital stay. The current result support the utility of the opioid demand as an adjunctive and complementary measure to assess risk of opioid misuse. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Age-related Opioid Exposure in Trauma: A Secondary Analysis of the Multimodal Analgesia Strategies for Trauma (MAST) Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effect of age on opioid consumption after traumatic injury. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Older trauma patients receive fewer opioids due to decreased metabolism and increased complications, but adequacy of pain control is unknown. We hypothesized that older trauma patients require fewer opioids to achieve adequate pain control. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the multimodal analgesia strategies for trauma Trial evaluating the effectiveness of 2 multimodal pain regimens in 1561 trauma patients aged 16 to 96 was performed. Older patients (≥55 years) were compared to younger patients. Median daily oral morphine milligram equivalents (MME) consumption, average numeric rating scale pain scores, complications, and death were assessed. Multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: Older patients (n = 562) had a median age of 68 years (interquartile range 61-78) compared to 33 (24-43) in younger patients. Older patients had lower injury severity scores (13 [9-20] vs 14 [9-22], P = 0.004), lower average pain scores (numeric rating scale 3 [1-4] vs 4 [2-5], P < 0.001), and consumed fewer MME/day (22 [10-45] vs 52 [28-78], P < 0.001). The multimodal analgesia strategies for trauma multi-modal pain regimen was effective at reducing opioid consumption at all ages. Additionally, on multivariable analysis including pain score adjustment, each decade age increase after 55 years was associated with a 23% reduction in MME/day consumed. CONCLUSIONS: Older trauma patients required fewer opioids than younger patients with similar characteristics and pain scores. Opioid dosing for post-traumatic pain should consider age. A 20 to 25% dose reduction per decade after age 55 may reduce opioid exposure without altering pain control.

Damage control laparotomy in trauma: a pilot randomized controlled trial. The DCL trial.

BACKGROUND: Although widely used in treating severe abdominal trauma, damage control laparotomy (DCL) has not been assessed in any randomized controlled trial. We conducted a pilot trial among patients for whom our surgeons had equipoise and hypothesized that definitive laparotomy (DEF) would reduce major abdominal complications (MAC) or death within 30 days compared with DCL. METHODS: Eligible patients undergoing emergency laparotomy were randomized during surgery to DCL or DEF from July 2016 to May 2019. The primary outcome was MAC or death within 30 days. Prespecified frequentist and Bayesian analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of 489 eligible patients, 39 patients were randomized (DCL 18, DEF 21) and included. Groups were similar in demographics and mechanism of injury. The DEF group had a higher Injury Severity Score (DEF median 34 (IQR 20, 43) vs DCL 29 (IQR 22, 41)) and received more prerandomization blood products (DEF median red blood cells 8 units (IQR 6, 11) vs DCL 6 units (IQR 2, 11)). In unadjusted analyses, the DEF group had more MAC or death within 30 days (1.71, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.63, p=0.159) due to more deaths within 30 days (DEF 33% vs DCL 0%, p=0.010). Adjustment for Injury Severity Score and prerandomization blood products reduced the risk ratio for MAC or death within 30 days to 1.54 (95% CI 0.71 to 3.32, p=0.274). The Bayesian probability that DEF increased MAC or death within 30 days was 85% in unadjusted analyses and 66% in adjusted analyses. CONCLUSION: The findings of our single center pilot trial were inconclusive. Outcomes were not worse with DCL and, in fact, may have been better. A randomized clinical trial of DCL is feasible and a larger, multicenter trial is needed to compare DCL and DEF for patients with severe abdominal trauma. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Impact of Opioid-Minimizing Pain Protocols After Burn Injury.

In 2019, we implemented a pill-based, opioid-minimizing pain protocol and protocolized moderate sedation for dressing changes in order to decrease opioid exposure in burn patients. We hypothesized that these interventions would reduce inpatient opioid exposure without increasing acute pain scores. Two groups of consecutive patients admitted to the burn service were compared: Pre-group (from January 1, 2018 to July 31, 2019) and Post-group (from January 1, 2020 to June 30, 2020) from before and after the implementation of the protocols (from August 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019). We abstracted patient demographics and burn injury characteristics from the burn registry. We obtained opioid exposure and pain scale scores from the electronic medical record. The primary outcome was total morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs). Secondary outcomes included MMEs/day, pain domain-specific MMEs, and pain scores. Pain was estimated by creating a normalized pain score (range 0-1), which incorporated three different pain scales (Numeric Rating Scale, Behavioral Pain Scale, and Behavioral Pain Assessment Scale). Groups were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum and chi-square tests. Treatment effects were estimated using Bayesian generalized linear models. There were no differences in demographics or burn characteristics between the Pre-group (n = 495) and Post-group (n = 174). The Post-group had significantly lower total MMEs (Post-group 110 MMEs [32, 325] vs Pre-group 230 [60, 840], P < .001), MMEs/day (Post-group 33 MMEs/day [15, 54] vs Pre-group 52 [27, 80], P < .001), and domain-specific total MMEs. No difference in average normalized pain scores was seen. Implementation of opioid-minimizing protocols for acute burn pain was associated with a significant reduction in inpatient opioid exposure without an increase in pain scores.

Association of Rideshare Use With Alcohol-Associated Motor Vehicle Crash Trauma.

Importance: Motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) are an important public health concern. Recent trends suggest that introducing rideshare services has decreased the incidence of MVCs. However, detailed analyses linking rideshare volume, convictions for impaired driving, and nonfatal MVC traumas remain inconclusive. Objective: To determine if there is an association between rideshare use and MVC traumas and convictions for impaired driving in Houston, Texas. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study was conducted between January 2007 and November 2019 with hospital data from the Red Duke Trauma Institute within the Memorial Hermann Hospital-Texas Medical Center and Ben Taub General Hospital. Rideshare data from Uber and Google covered trips taken within Houston, Texas, from February 2014 (the date of deployment of Uber to Houston) to December 2018. Impaired driving convictions included all indictments made by the Harris County, Texas, District Attorney's office from January 2007 to December 2018. All adults with MVC traumas evaluated at both centers in the study population (individuals >16 years with a mechanism of injury classified under "motor vehicle collision") were included. Impaired driving incidents were included only if the final legal outcome was conviction. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary study outcomes were the incident rate ratios for hourly MVC traumas and daily impaired driving convictions. Results: A total of 23 491 MVC traumas (involving patients with a mean [SD] age of 37.9 [17.8] years and 14 603 male individuals [62.1%]), 93 742 impaired driving convictions, and more than 24 million Uber rides were analyzed. Following the introduction of Uber in February 2014, MVC traumas decreased by 23.8% (from a mean [SD] of 0.26 [0.04] to 0.21 [0.06] trauma incidents per hour) during peak trauma periods (Friday and Saturday nights). The incident rate ratio of MVC traumas following Uber deployment was 0.33 (95% CI, 0.17-0.67) per 1000 indexed rides (P = .002). Furthermore, rideshare use was associated with a significant, geographically linked reduction in impaired driving convictions between January 2014 to December 2019 (incidence rate ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.73-0.78]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, introducing rideshare services in the Houston metropolitan area was associated with significant reductions in MVC traumas and impaired driving convictions. Increased use of rideshares may be an effective means of reducing impaired driving and decreasing rate of MVC traumas.