Incorporating a Trauma-Informed Care Protocol Into Pediatric Trauma Evaluation: The Pediatric PAUSE Does Not Delay Imaging or Disposition.

OBJECTIVES: Trauma evaluation in the emergency department (ED) can be a stressful event for children. With the goal of minimizing pain, anxiety, and unneeded interventions in stable patients, we implemented the Pediatric PAUSE at our level 1 adult/level 2 pediatric trauma center. The Pediatric PAUSE is a brief protocol performed after the primary survey, which addresses Pain/Privacy, Anxiety/IV Access, Urinary Catheter/Rectal exam/Genital exam, Support from family or staff, and Explain to patient/Engage with PICU team. The aim was to assess whether performing the PAUSE interfered with timeliness of emergent imaging in pediatric patients and their disposition. METHODS: We identified all patients aged 0 to 18 years evaluated as trauma activations at our institution after the Pediatric PAUSE was implemented (October 1, 2016-March 31, 2017) as well as 2 analogous 6-month pre-PAUSE periods. Patient demographics, time to imaging studies, and time to ED disposition were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-two patients met the study criteria, with a mean age of 10.9 years and mean injury severity score of 10.6. One hundred fifteen participants (68.5%) were transferred from other hospitals, and 101 (87.8%) had ≥1 imaging study performed before arrival. The Pediatric PAUSE was performed for 41 (25%) of 163 study participants. There was no difference in time to first imaging study in participants for whom the PAUSE was performed (18.4 vs 15.0 minutes, P = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: The PAUSE is a practice intervention designed to address the psychosocial needs of pediatric trauma patients and their families to help prevent posttraumatic stress symptoms. Implementation did not interfere with the timeliness of first imaging in pediatric trauma patients.

Reducing Radiation and Lowering Costs With a Standardized Care Pathway for Nonoperative Thoracolumbar Fractures.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. OBJECTIVE: There is marked variation in the management of nonoperative thoracolumbar (TL) compression and burst fractures. This was a quality improvement study designed to establish a standardized care pathway for TL fractures treated with bracing, and to then evaluate differences in radiographs, length of stay (LOS), and cost before and after the pathway. METHODS: A standardized pathway was established for management of nonoperative TL burst and compression fractures (AOSpine classification type A1-A4 fractures). Bracing, radiographs, costs, complications, and LOS before and after pathway adoption were analyzed. Differences between the neurosurgery and orthopedic spine services were compared. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2015, 406 nonoperative burst and compression TL fractures were identified. A total of 183 (45.1%) were braced, 60.6% with a custom-made thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO) and 39.4% with an off-the-shelf TLSO. The number of radiographs significantly reduced after initiation of the pathway (3.23 vs 2.63, P = .010). A total of 98.6% of braces were custom-made before the pathway; 69.6% were off-the-shelf after the pathway. The total cost for braced patients after pathway adoption decreased from $10 462.36 to $8928.58 (P = .078). Brace-associated costs were significantly less for off-the-shelf TSLO versus custom TLSO ($1352.41 vs $3719.53, respectively, P < .001). The mean LOS and complication rate did not change significantly following pathway adoption. The orthopedic spine service braced less frequently than the neurosurgery service (40.7% vs 52.2%, P = .023). CONCLUSIONS: Standardized care pathways can reduce cost and radiation exposure without increasing complication rates in nonoperative management of thoracolumbar compression and burst fractures.

Helmet use is associated with higher Injury Severity Scores in alpine skiers and snowboarders evaluated at a Level I trauma center.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty regarding the efficacy of ski helmets in preventing traumatic injury. We investigated the relationship between helmet use, injury types, and injury severity among skiers and snowboarders. METHODS: The trauma registry at a Northeast American College of Surgeons Level I trauma center was queried by International Classification of Diseases Codes-9th or 10th Revision for skiing and snowboarding injury between 2010 and 2018. The primary exposure was helmet use and primary outcome was severe injury (Injury Severity Score >15). We performed univariate and multivariable logistic regression to assess for injury types and severity associated with helmet use. RESULTS: Seven hundred twenty-one patients (65% helmeted, 35% unhelmeted) met inclusion criteria. Helmet use doubled during the study period (43% to 81%, p < 0.001), but the rate of any head injury did not significantly change (49% to 43%, p = 0.499). On multivariable regression, helmeted patients were significantly more likely to suffer severe injury (odds ratio [OR], 2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-3.11), intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.10-2.96), chest injury (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.05-2.61), and/or lumbosacral spine injury (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.04-3.25) than unhelmeted patients. Helmeted patients were half as likely to suffer cervical spine injury (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30-0.89) and a third as likely to sustain skull fracture and/or scalp laceration (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.14-0.64). More patients who hit a stationary object were helmeted compared with those who fell from standing height onto snow (70% vs. 56% respectively, p < 0.001). After adjustment, hitting a stationary object was the injury mechanism most significantly associated with severe injury (OR, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.79-4.38). CONCLUSION: Helmeted skiers and snowboarders evaluated at a Level I trauma center were more likely to suffer severe injury, including intracranial hemorrhage, as compared with unhelmeted participants. However, they were less likely to sustain skull fractures or cervical spine injuries. Helmeted patients were also more likely to hit a stationary object. Our findings reinforce the importance of safe skiing practices and trauma evaluation after high-impact injury, regardless of helmet use. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and epidemiological, level IV.

New developments in massive transfusion in trauma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Trauma patients requiring massive transfusion represent a population at high risk for potentially preventable death. This review describes recent advances in the early recognition and treatment of the coagulopathy of trauma, as well as ongoing work to define optimal resuscitation strategies. RECENT FINDINGS: Damage control resuscitation involves the rapid correction of hypothermia and acidosis, direct treatment of coagulopathy, and early transfusion in trauma patients. Recent evidence demonstrates improved mortality and lower overall blood product usage with higher ratios of plasma and platelets to red blood cells transfused. Adjuncts to damage control resuscitation such as factor VIIa may also be beneficial. Thrombelastography and advances in point-of-care testing may provide timely measurements to help guide massive transfusion in patients based on their individual needs. SUMMARY: As optimal resuscitation strategies continue to evolve, recent efforts have focused on early and aggressive treatment of coagulopathy, with higher ratios of plasma and platelets to red blood cells transfused. Early evidence suggests that such strategies have a beneficial outcome in regards to trauma-related mortality.

Genetic interventions for vein bypass graft disease: a review.

The failure of vein bypass grafting in the coronary or lower extremity circulation is a common clinical occurrence that incurs significant morbidity, mortality, and cost. Vein grafts are uniquely amenable to intraoperative genetic modification because of the ability to manipulate the tissue ex vivo with controlled conditions. Although the pathophysiology of vein graft failure is incompletely understood, numerous relevant molecular targets have been elucidated. Interventions designed to influence cell proliferation, thrombosis, inflammation, and matrix remodeling at the genetic level have been described, and many have been tested in animal models. Both gene delivery and gene blockade strategies have been investigated, with the latter now reaching the stage of advanced clinical trials. This review describes the basic and translational science of genetic interventions for vein graft disease and the current state of application in the clinic.