A Decade of Firearm Injuries: Have We Improved?

BACKGROUND: Firearm injuries are a growing public health issue, with marked increases coinciding with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study evaluates temporal trends over the past decade, hypothesizing that despite a growing number of injuries, mortality would be unaffected. In addition, the study characterizes the types of centers affected disproportionately by the reported firearm injury surge in 2020. METHODS: Patients aged 18 years and older with firearm injuries from 2011-2020 were identified retrospectively using the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB®). Trauma centers not operating for the entirety of the study period were excluded to allow for temporal comparisons. Joinpoint regression and risk-standardized mortality ratios (SMR) were used to evaluate injury counts and adjusted mortality over time. Subgroup analysis was performed to describe centers with the largest increases in firearm injuries in 2020. RESULTS: A total of 238,674 patients, treated at 420 unique trauma centers, met inclusion criteria. Firearm injuries increased by 31.1% in 2020, compared to an annual percent change of 2.4% from 2011-2019 (p = 0.01). Subset analysis of centers with the largest changes in firearm injuries in 2020 found that they were more often level I centers, with higher historic trauma volumes and percentages of firearm injuries (p < 0.001). Unadjusted mortality decreased by 0.9% from 2011-2020, but after controlling for demographics, injury characteristics and physiology, there was no difference in adjusted mortality over the same time period. However, among patients with injury severity scores ≥25, adjusted mortality improved compared to 2011 (SMR of 0.950 in 2020, 95% CI 0.916 - 0.986). CONCLUSIONS: Firearm injuries pose an increasing burden to trauma systems, with level I and high-volume centers seeing the largest growth in 2020. Despite increasing numbers of firearm injuries, mortality has remained unchanged over the past decade. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Prognostic/Epidemiologic.

Thrombotic Events and Anticoagulation-Related Bleeding Complications in Critically Ill Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019.

Background: Thrombosis (T) is common in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, and d-dimer concentrations correlate with outcomes. Controversy exists with regards to anticoagulation (AC) for patients. We implemented a full-heparinization AC protocol from the onset of the pandemic and hypothesized that a safety signal would be undetectable. Patients and Methods: Prospective evaluation of 111 patients with COVID-19 critical illness hospitalized from March to June 2020. All patients received therapeutic heparinoid-based AC from admission. Incidences of T, bleeding (B), or both (BT) were noted. The primary outcome was mortality. Kruskal-Wallis test and logistic regression were performed. Results are expressed as n (%), median (interquartile range) and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Alpha was set at 0.05. Results: Thirty-two patients (28%) had T, 23 (20%) had B, and 14 (12%) had BT; 42 (40%) patients were unaffected. Two logistic regression models (outcome = mortality) evaluated BT as T, or BT as B. For BT as T, neither T, B, nor male gender predicted mortality; similarly, for BT as B, neither T, B, nor male gender predicted mortality. Factors associated with higher odds of death included higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score (odds ratio [OR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.13; p = 0.0045), higher d-dimer concentration (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01; p = 0.043), and higher activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT; OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.16; p = 0.010). Conclusions: Neither T nor B predicted mortality in this prospective cohort of anticoagulated patients with COVID-19 critical illness. These data support continued full-dose heparinoid prophylaxis.

Self-selection vs Randomized Assignment of Treatment for Appendicitis.

Importance: For adults with appendicitis, several randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that antibiotics are an effective alternative to appendectomy. However, it remains unknown how the characteristics of patients in such trials compare with those of patients who select their treatment and whether outcomes differ. Objective: To compare participants in the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) randomized clinical trial (RCT) with a parallel cohort study of participants who declined randomization and self-selected treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: The CODA trial was conducted in 25 US medical centers. Participants were enrolled between May 3, 2016, and February 5, 2020; all participants were eligible for at least 1 year of follow-up, with all follow-up ending in 2021. The randomized cohort included 1094 adults with appendicitis; the self-selection cohort included patients who declined participation in the randomized group, of whom 253 selected appendectomy and 257 selected antibiotics. In this secondary analysis, characteristics and outcomes in both self-selection and randomized cohorts are described with an exploratory analysis of cohort status and receipt of appendectomy. Interventions: Appendectomy vs antibiotics. Main Outcomes and Measures: Characteristics among participants randomized to either appendectomy or antibiotics were compared with those of participants who selected their own treatment. Results: Clinical characteristics were similar across the self-selection cohort (510 patients; mean age, 35.8 years [95% CI, 34.5-37.1]; 218 female [43%; 95% CI, 39%-47%]) and the randomized group (1094 patients; mean age, 38.2 years [95% CI, 37.4-39.0]; 386 female [35%; 95% CI, 33%-38%]). Compared with the randomized group, those in the self-selection cohort were less often Spanish speaking (n = 99 [19%; 95% CI, 16%-23%] vs n = 336 [31%; 95% CI, 28%-34%]), reported more formal education (some college or more, n = 355 [72%; 95% CI, 68%-76%] vs n = 674 [63%; 95% CI, 60%-65%]), and more often had commercial insurance (n = 259 [53%; 95% CI, 48%-57%] vs n = 486 [45%; 95% CI, 42%-48%]). Most outcomes were similar between the self-selection and randomized cohorts. The number of patients undergoing appendectomy by 30 days was 38 (15.3%; 95% CI, 10.7%-19.7%) among those selecting antibiotics and 155 (19.2%; 95% CI, 15.9%-22.5%) in those who were randomized to antibiotics (difference, 3.9%; 95% CI, -1.7% to 9.5%). Differences in the rate of appendectomy were primarily observed in the non-appendicolith subgroup. Conclusions and Relevance: This secondary analysis of the CODA RCT found substantially similar outcomes across the randomized and self-selection cohorts, suggesting that the randomized trial results are generalizable to the community at large. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

Patient Factors Associated With Appendectomy Within 30 Days of Initiating Antibiotic Treatment for Appendicitis.

IMPORTANCE: Use of antibiotics for the treatment of appendicitis is safe and has been found to be noninferior to appendectomy based on self-reported health status at 30 days. Identifying patient characteristics associated with a greater likelihood of appendectomy within 30 days in those who initiate antibiotics could support more individualized decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To assess patient factors associated with undergoing appendectomy within 30 days of initiating antibiotics for appendicitis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cohort study using data from the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) randomized clinical trial, characteristics among patients who initiated antibiotics were compared between those who did and did not undergo appendectomy within 30 days. The study was conducted at 25 US medical centers; participants were enrolled between May 3, 2016, and February 5, 2020. A total of 1552 participants with acute appendicitis were randomized to antibiotics (776 participants) or appendectomy (776 participants). Data were analyzed from September 2020 to July 2021. EXPOSURES: Appendectomy vs antibiotics. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Conditional logistic regression models were fit to estimate associations between specific patient factors and the odds of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days after initiating antibiotics. A sensitivity analysis was performed excluding participants who underwent appendectomy within 30 days for nonclinical reasons. RESULTS: Of 776 participants initiating antibiotics (mean [SD] age, 38.3 [13.4] years; 286 [37%] women and 490 [63%] men), 735 participants had 30-day outcomes, including 154 participants (21%) who underwent appendectomy within 30 days. After adjustment for other factors, female sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.31), radiographic finding of wider appendiceal diameter (OR per 1-mm increase, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.00-1.18), and presence of appendicolith (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.28-3.10) were associated with increased odds of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days. Characteristics that are often associated with increased risk of complications (eg, advanced age, comorbid conditions) and those clinicians often use to describe appendicitis severity (eg, fever: OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.82-1.98) were not associated with odds of 30-day appendectomy. The sensitivity analysis limited to appendectomies performed for clinical reasons provided similar results regarding appendicolith (adjusted OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.49-3.91). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This cohort study found that presence of an appendicolith was associated with a nearly 2-fold increased risk of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days of initiating antibiotics. Clinical characteristics often used to describe severity of appendicitis were not associated with odds of 30-day appendectomy. This information may help guide more individualized decision-making for people with appendicitis.

Rotational thromboelastometry in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome owing to coronavirus disease 2019: Is there a viscoelastic fingerprint and a role for predicting thrombosis?

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated rotational thromboelastometry tracings in 44 critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients, to determine whether there is a viscoelastic fingerprint and to test the hypothesis that the diagnosis and prediction of venous thromboembolism would be enhanced by the addition of rotational thromboelastometry testing. RESULTS: Rotational thromboelastometry values reflected an increase in clot strength for the EXTEM, INTEM, and FIBTEM assays beyond the reference range. No hyperfibrinolysis was noted. Fibrinolysis shutdown was present but did not correlate with thrombosis; 32% (14/44) of patients experienced a thrombotic episode. For every 1 mm increase of FIBTEM maximum clot formation, the odds of developing thrombosis increased 20% (95% confidence interval, 0-40%, P = .043), whereas for every 1,000 ng/mL increase in D-dimer, the odds of thrombosis increased by 70% (95% confidence interval, 20%-150%, P = .004), after adjustment for age and sex (AUC 0.96, 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.00). There was a slight but significant improvement in model performance after adding FIBTEM maximum clot formation and EXTEM clot formation time to D-dimer in a multivariable model (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: D-dimer concentrations were more predictive of thrombosis in our patient population than any other parameter. Rotational thromboelastometry confirmed the hypercoagulable state of coronavirus disease 2019 intensive care unit patients. FIBTEM maximum clot formation and EXTEM clot formation time increased the predictability for thrombosis compared with only using D-dimer. Rotational thromboelastometry analysis is most useful in augmenting the information provided by the D-dimer concentration for venous thromboembolism risk assessment when the D-dimer concentration is between 1,625 and 6,900 ng/dL, but the enhancement is modest. Fibrinolysis shutdown did not correlate with thrombosis.

Probative Value of the D-Dimer Assay for Diagnosis of Deep Venous Thrombosis in the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the predictive utility of the D-dimer assay among patients with the coronavirus disease 2019 syndrome for unprovoked lower extremity deep venous thrombosis. DESIGN: Prospective observational study with retrospective data analysis. SETTING: Academic medical center surgical ICU. PATIENTS: Seventy-two intubated patients with critical illness from coronavirus disease 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Therapeutic anticoagulation after imaging diagnosis of the first three deep venous thrombosis cases was confirmed; therapeutic anticoagulation as prophylaxis thereafter to all subsequent ICU admissions. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Seventy-two patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 were screened for deep venous thrombosis after ICU admission with 102 duplex ultrasound examinations, with 12 cases (16.7%) of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis identified. There were no differences between groups with respect to age, renal function, or biomarkers except for D-dimer (median, 12,858 ng/mL [interquartile range, 3,176-30,770 ng/mL] for lower extremity deep venous thrombosis vs 2,087 ng/mL [interquartile range, 638-3,735 ng/mL] for no evidence of deep venous thrombosis; p < 0.0001). Clinical screening tools (Wells score and Dutch Primary Care Rule) had no utility. The C-statistic for D-dimer concentration was 0.874 ± 0.065. At the model-predicted cutoff value of 3,000 ng/mL, sensitivity was 100%, specificity was 51.1%, positive predictive value was 21.8%, and negative predictive value was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Lower extremity deep venous thrombosis is prevalent in coronavirus disease 2019 disease and can be present on ICU admission. Screening has been recommended in the context of the pro-inflammatory, hypercoagulable background milieu. D-dimer concentrations are elevated in nearly all coronavirus disease 2019 patients, and the test appears reliable for screening for lower extremity deep venous thrombosis at or above a concentration of 3,000 ng/mL (more than 13-fold above the normal range). Full anticoagulation is indicated if the diagnosis is confirmed, and therapeutic anticoagulation should be considered for prophylaxis, as all coronavirus disease 2019 patients are at increased risk.

Stop the Bleed: Effective Training in Need of Improvement.

BACKGROUND: The "Stop the Bleed" (StB) campaign aims to educate laypersons on performing bleeding control techniques in any setting that requires hemorrhage control, such as motor vehicle crashes or mass casualty incidents. Participants undergo a didactic and practical session, the latter incorporating a mannequin. We hypothesized that participants would increase content knowledge after StB participation and that the training could be improved by a more life-like bleeding modification of the mannequin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From July 2017 to January 2018, hospital and community members from a major metropolitan area participated in StB training. Participants provided demographic data regarding prior emergency training and were asked pre- and post-test questions (five-point Likert scale) regarding their response to hemorrhage. Individuals also evaluated the mannequin on bleeding simulation. Scores were reported as means with standard deviation or medians with interquartile ranges (IQRs) with subset analysis stratified by experience. RESULTS: Of 402 participants, 310 provided complete data. On the composite, pre-test self-assessment, participants had a median score of 24 of 30 points (IQR 16-30). Post-testing demonstrated a statistically significant increase with a median score of 29 (IQR 25-30, P < 0.05). Subset analysis by prior emergency training (n = 102) demonstrated that both those with prior emergency training and those with no prior emergency training had significant improvement. On evaluation of the mannequin, participants reported that a more realistic model would increase their confidence in technique. Both subgroups reported that training would be enhanced if the mannequins were more realistic. CONCLUSIONS: StB is an effective education program. Those without prior experience or training in hemorrhage cessation demonstrated the most improvement. Regardless of background, participants reported overwhelmingly that the training would be more effective if it were more realistic. Future work to design and develop cost-effective mannequins demonstrating pulsatile blood flow and cessation of hemorrhage could enable learners to actually "Stop the Bleed".

General Surgery Residents' Perception of Feedback: We Can Do Better.

BACKGROUND: Feedback (FB) regarding perioperative care is essential in general surgery residents' (GSRs) training. We hypothesized that FB would be distributed unevenly across preoperative (PrO), intraoperative (IO), and postoperative (PO) continuum of the perioperative period. We aimed to compare results between university- and community-hospital settings planning to institute structured, formalized FB in a large health care system operating multiple surgery residency programs in departments that are linked strategically. METHODS: Quantitative, cross-sectional, Likert scale anonymous surveys were distributed to all GSRs (categorical and preliminary; university: community 1:2). Twenty-five questions considered frequency and perceived quality of FB in PrO, IO, and PO settings. Data were tabulated using REDCap and analyzed in Microsoft Excel using the Mann-Whitney U test, with α = 0.05. Comparisons were made between university- and community-hospital settings, between junior (Post-Graduate Year (PGY) 1-3) and senior (PGY 4-5) GSRs, and by gender. RESULTS: Among 115 GSRs surveyed, 83 (72%) responded. Whereas 93% reported receiving some FB within the past year, 46% reported receiving FB ≤ 20% of the time. A majority (58%) found FB to be helpful ≥ 80% of the time. Among GSRs, 77%, 24%, and 64% reported receiving PrO, IO, or PO FB ≤ 20% of the time, respectively, but 52% also believed that FB was lacking in all 3 areas. Most GSRs wanted designated time for PrO planning FB (82%) and PO FB (87%), respectively. Thirty-six percent of GSRs reported that senior/chief (i.e., PGY-4/PGY-5 GSRs) took them through cases ≥40% of the time; notably,78% reported that FB from senior/chief GSRs was equally or more valuable than FB from attending surgeons. A majority (78%) reported that attending surgeons stated explicitly when they were providing FB only ≤20% of the time. GSRs at the community hospital campuses reported receiving a higher likelihood of "any" FB, IO FB, and PO FB (p < 0.05). Most GSRs surveyed preferred a structured format and designated times for debriefing and evaluation of performance. Subanalyses of gender and GSR level of training showed no differences. CONCLUSIONS: FB during GSR training varies across the perioperative continuum of care. Community programs seem to do better than University Programs. More work need to be done to elucidate why differences exist between the frequency of FB at University and Community programs. Further, data show particularly low FB outside of the operating room. Ideally, according to respondents, FB would be provided in a structured format and at designated times for debriefing and evaluation of performance, which poses a challenge considering the temporal dynamism of general surgery services.

Advancing the Education of Stop the Bleed: Development of a Perfused Synthetic Cadaver Model.

BACKGROUND: As active shootings and mass casualty incidents have become more prevalent, courses designed to teach basic hemorrhage control to laypersons have proliferated. Participants currently undergo Stop the Bleed (StB) training currently use a synthetic limb mannequin. In a prior survey of 88 participants, there was overwhelming sentiment that the mannequin was limited by its inability to demonstrate cessation of bleeding when hemorrhage control techniques were applied. We hypothesized that simulated bleeding that can be controlled by StB techniques would improve the mannequin and increase confidence of trainees in achieving bleeding control. METHODS: The mannequin was redesigned to be a self-contained model mimicking bleeding, with fluid flowing from a reservoir into a latex tubing with a laceration mimicking an arterial wound. Fluid was pumped by a rubber bulb attached to the tubing and held in the instructor's hand. Twenty StB trainers conducted beta testing of the perfused mannequin. Forty participants underwent training with both old and new models and completed posttraining surveys. RESULTS: Beta-testers reported positive feedback regarding both realism of the perfused mannequin and participants' ability to obtain bleeding control using StB techniques. Participants who trialed the mannequin reported increased awareness of the rate of blood flow out of a wound, which in turn increased their sense of urgency to achieve hemostasis. CONCLUSIONS: In an effort to address shortcomings noted by participants in the current StB mannequin, we developed a novel perfused bleeding mannequin, which responds appropriately to various hemorrhage cessation techniques and is both high fidelity and low cost.

World trauma education: hemorrhage control training for healthcare providers in India.

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhage remains a major cause of death around the world. Eighty percent of trauma patients in India do not receive medical care within the first hour. The etiology of these poor outcomes is multifactorial. We describe findings from the first Stop the Bleed (StB) course recently offered to a group of medical providers in southern India. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 101 participants who attended StB trainings in India was performed. Pre-training and post-training questionnaires were collected from each participant. In total, 88 healthcare providers' responses were analyzed. Three bleeding control skills were presented: wound compression, wound packing, and tourniquet application. RESULTS: Among participants, only 23.9% had received prior bleeding control training. Participants who reported feeling 'extremely confident' responding to an emergency medical situation rose from 68.2% prior to StB training to 94.3% post-training. Regarding hemorrhage control abilities, 37.5% felt extremely confident before the training, compared with 95.5% after the training. For wound packing and tourniquet application, 44.3% and 53.4%, respectively, felt extremely confident pre-training, followed by 97.7% for both skills post-training. Importantly, 90.9% of StB trainees felt comfortable teaching newly acquired hemorrhage control skills. A significant majority of participants said that confidence in their wound packing and tourniquet skills would improve with more realistic mannequins. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first StB training in India. Disparities in access to care, long transport times, and insufficient numbers of prehospital personnel contribute to its significant trauma burden. Dissemination of these critical life-saving skills into this region and the resulting civilian interventions will increase the number of trauma patients who survive long enough to reach a trauma center. Additionally, considerations should be given to translating the course into local languages to increase program reach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Association Between Insurance Status and Hospital Length of Stay Following Trauma.

Previous research has demonstrated that nonclinical factors are associated with differences in clinical care, with uninsured patients receiving decreased resource use. Studies on trauma populations have also shown unclear relationships between insurance status and hospital length of stay (LOS), a commonly used metric for evaluating quality of care. The objective of this study is to define the relationship between insurance status and LOS after trauma using the largest available national trauma dataset and controlling for significant confounders. Data from 2007 to 2010 National Trauma Data Bank were used to compare differences in LOS among three insurance groups: privately insured, publically insured, and uninsured trauma patients. Multivariable regression models adjusted for potential confounding due to baseline differences in injury severity and demographic and clinical factors. A total of 884,493 patients met the inclusion criteria. After adjusting for the influence of covariates, uninsured patients had significantly shorter hospital stays (0.3 days) relative to privately insured patients. Publicly insured patients had longer risk-adjusted LOS (0.9 days). Stratified differences in discharge disposition and injury severity significantly altered the relationship between insurance status and LOS. In conclusion, this study elucidates the association between insurance status and hospital LOS, demonstrating that a patient's ability to pay could alter LOS in acute trauma patients. Additional research is needed to examine causes and outcomes from these differences to increase efficiency in the health care system, decrease costs, and shrink disparities in health outcomes.

The hazards of off-road motor sports: Are four wheels better than two?

BACKGROUND: Off-road motorsports are an increasing popular activity, yet the relative safety profile of all-terrain vehicles (ATV) to off-road motorcycles (ORMC) has not been compared. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of the 2002-2006 US National Trauma Data Bank of ATV and ORMC crash victims. Patients were described according to demographic (age, sex, race and ethnicity, insurance status) and injury characteristics (Injury Severity Score, hypotension, motor component of the Glasgow Coma Score, presence of a severe head or extremity injury) known to affect trauma outcomes. Logistic regression evaluated the independent effect of an ATV vehicle on mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and placement on a ventilator relative to ORMC. The anatomic distribution of severe injuries was compared between survivors and decedents within each vehicle type. RESULTS: A total of 34,457 patients met inclusion criteria, of whom, 24,582 were ATV patients and 9875 were ORMC patients. ATV patients had 51% higher risk-adjusted odds of death (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.03-2.20), 55% higher risk-adjusted odds of being admitted to an ICU (OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.42-1.70), and 42% higher risk-adjusted odds of being placed on a ventilator (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.17-1.72) compared to ORMC crash victims. Decedents in both vehicle types were more likely to suffer severe head, thoracic, and abdominal injuries relative to their surviving counterparts. CONCLUSION: For injured riders, ATVs are associated with increased mortality and higher resource utilisation compared to ORMCs. Both groups suffer distinct anatomic injuries, suggesting the need for focused areas of injury prevention planning and research.

Association between intentional injury and long-term survival after trauma.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk-adjusted mortality of intentionally injured patients within 7 to 9 years postinjury, compared with unintentionally injured patients. BACKGROUND: Violent injury contributes significantly to trauma mortality in the United States. Homicide is the second leading killer of American youth, aged 15 to 24 years. Long-term survival among intentionally injured patients has not been well studied. It is also unknown whether intentionally injured patients have worse long-term survival compared with unintentionally or accidentally injured patients with equivalent injuries. METHODS: Adult trauma patients admitted for 24 hours or more and discharged alive from the Johns Hopkins Hospital from January 1, 1998, to December 31, 2000, were included. The primary outcome was mortality within 7 to 9 years postinjury. Long-term patient survival was determined using the National Death Index. The association between injury intentionality and mortality was investigated using a Cox proportional hazard regression model, adjusted for confounders such as injury severity and patient race, socioeconomic status, and comorbid conditions. Overall differences in survival between those with intentional versus unintentional injury were also determined by comparing adjusted Kaplan-Meier survival curves. RESULTS: A total of 2062 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 56.4% were intentionally injured and 43.6% were unintentionally injured. Compared with unintentionally injured patients, intentionally injured patients were younger and more often male and from a zip code with low median household income. Approximately 15% of all patients had died within 7 to 9 years of follow-up. Older age and presence of comorbidities were associated with this outcome; however, intentional injury was not found to be significantly associated with long-term mortality rates. There was also no significant difference in survival curves between groups; intentionally injured patients were much more likely to die of a subsequent injury, whereas those with unintentional injury commonly died of noninjury causes. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in mortality between intentionally injured and unintentionally injured patients within 7 to 9 years postinjury. These results confirm the long-term effectiveness of lifesaving trauma care for those with intentional injury. However, given that patients with intentional injuries were more likely to suffer a subsequent violent death, interventions focused on breaking the cycle of violence are needed.

The severity of disparity: increasing injury intensity accentuates disparate outcomes following trauma.

OBJECTIVE: Studies have shown disparities in mortality among racial groups and among those with differing insurance coverage. Our goal was to determine if injury severity affects these disparities. METHODS: We classified patients from the 2003-2008 National Trauma Data Banks suffering moderate to severe injuries into six groups based on race/ethnicity and insurance, stratifying by injury severity. Logistic regression compared odds of death between races-ethnicities/insurance groups within these strata. We adjusted for age, gender, Injury Severity Score, Glasgow Coma Scale motor component, hypotension, and mechanism of injury. RESULTS: Patients meeting inclusion criteria numbered 760,598. Disparities between races-ethnicities/insurance groups increased as injury severity worsened. Odds of death for uninsured Black patients compared with insured Whites increased from 1.82 among moderately injured patients to 3.14 among severely injured, hypotensive patients. A similar pattern was seen among uninsured Hispanic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in trauma mortality suffered by minority and uninsured patients, when compared with non-minority and insured patients, worsen with increasing injury.

Predictors of sepsis in moderately severely injured patients: an analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.

BACKGROUND: Post-traumatic sepsis is a significant cause of in-hospital death. However, socio-demographic and clinical characteristics that may predict sepsis in injured patients are not well known. The objective of this study was to identify risk factors that may be associated with post-traumatic sepsis. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients in the National Trauma Data Bank for 2007-2008. Patients older than 16 years of age with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 9 points were included. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine association of sepsis with patient (age, gender, ethnicity, and insurance status), injury (mechanism, ISS, injury type, hypotension), and clinical (major surgical procedure, intensive care unit admission) characteristics. RESULTS: Of a total of 1.3 million patients, 373,370 met the study criteria, and 1.4% developed sepsis, with an associated mortality rate of approximately 20%. Age, male gender, African-American race, hypotension on emergency department presentation, and motor vehicle crash as the injury mechanism were independently associated with post-traumatic sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Socio-demographic and injury factors, such as age, race, hypotension on admission, and severity and mechanism of injury predict post-traumatic sepsis significantly. Further exploration to explain why these patient groups are at increased risk is warranted in order to understand better and potentially prevent this life-threatening complication.

Regional variations in cost of trauma care in the United States: who is paying more?

BACKGROUND: The study of regional variations in costs of care has been used to identify areas of savings for several diseases and conditions. This study investigates similar potential regional differences in the cost of adult trauma care using an all-payer, nationally representative sample. METHODS: Trauma patients aged 18 to 64 years in the 2006-2008 Nationwide Inpatient Sample were identified using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Those with isolated diagnoses for five index conditions (ICs): blunt splenic injury, liver injury, tibia fracture, moderate traumatic brain injury, and pneumothorax/hemothorax were selected. Cost was estimated from charges using a cost-to-charge ratio. Generalized linear modeling was used to compare the mean cost for treating these ICs between US regions (Northeast, South, Midwest, and West), adjusting for hospital factors (size, teaching status, and location), patient demographics, injury severity, length of stay, Charlson comorbidity index, local wage index, and payer. Relative mean cost (RC) was calculated using Northeast as the reference, and sampling weights were applied to obtain regional estimates. Differences in adjusted mortality between regions were also assessed. RESULTS: Adjusted relative costs were estimated for 62,678 patients (South: 28,536; West: 12,975; Midwest: 11,450; and Northeast: 9,717). Mean costs for liver injury were 22%higher in the Midwest compared with the Northeast (RC: 1.22; 95%confidence interval [CI]: 1.10-1.35). Similarly higher costs were seen with other regions and ICs (RC for blunt splenic injury in the South: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.07-1.31; RC for pneumothorax/hemothorax in the West: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.22-1.41). No differences in adjusted mortality by region were noted overall. CONCLUSION: Even after controlling for factors known to influence medical care cost, as well as controlling for geographic differences in pricing, significant regional differences exist in the cost of trauma care. Exploring these variations may assist in identifying potential areas for cost savings.

Should the IDC-9 Trauma Mortality Prediction Model become the new paradigm for benchmarking trauma outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Optimum quantification of injury severity remains an imprecise science with a need for improvement. The accuracy of the criterion standard Injury Severity Score (ISS) worsens as a patient's injury severity increases, especially among patients with penetrating trauma. The objective of this study was to comprehensively compare the mortality prediction ability of three anatomic injury severity indices: the ISS, the New ISS (NISS), and the DRG International Classification of Diseases-9th Rev.-Trauma Mortality Prediction Model (TMPM-ICD-9), a recently developed contemporary injury assessment model. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients in the National Trauma Data Bank from 2007 to 2008. The TMPM-ICD-9 values were computed and compared with the ISS and NISS for each patient using in-hospital mortality after trauma as the outcome measure. Discrimination and calibration were compared using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve. Subgroup analysis was performed to compare each score across varying ranges of injury severity and across different types of injury. RESULTS: A total of 533,898 patients were identified with a crude mortality rate of 4.7%. The ISS and NISS performed equally in the groups with minor (ISS, 1-8) and moderate (ISS, 9-15) injuries, regardless of the injury type. However, in the populations with severe (ISS, 16-24) and very severe (ISS, ≥ 25) injuries for all injury types, the NISS predicted mortality better than the ISS did. The TMPM-ICD-9 outperformed both the NISS and ISS almost consistently. CONCLUSION: The NISS and TMPM-ICD-9 are both superior predictors of mortality as compared with the ISS. The immediate adoption of NISS for evaluating trauma outcomes using trauma registry data is recommended. The TMPM-ICD-9 may be an even better measure of human injury, and its use in administrative or nonregistry data is suggested. Further research on its attributes is recommended because it has the potential to become the basis for benchmarking trauma outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level III.