Hospice and palliative care utilization in 16 004 232 medicare claims: comparing trauma to surgical and medical inpatients.

Background: Hospice and palliative care (PC) utilization is increasing in geriatric inpatients, but limited research exists comparing rates among trauma, surgical and medical specialties. The goal of this study was to determine whether there are differences among these three groups in rates of hospice and PC utilization. Methods: Patients from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Inpatient Standard Analytical Files for 2016-2020 aged ≥65 years were analyzed. Patients with a National Trauma Data Standard-qualifying ICD-10 injury code with abbreviated injury score ≥2 were classified as 'trauma'; the rest as 'surgical' or 'medical' using CMS MS-DRG definitions. Patients were classified as having PC if they had an ICD-10 diagnosis code for PC (Z51.5) and as hospice discharge (HD) if their hospital disposition was 'hospice' (home or inpatient). Use proportions for specialties were compared by group and by subgroups with increasing risk of poor outcome. Results: There were 16M hospitalizations from 1024 hospitals (9.3% trauma, 26.3% surgical and 64.4% medical) with 53.7% women, 84.5% white and 38.7% >80 years. Overall, 6.2% received PC and 4.1% a HD. Both rates were higher in trauma patients (HD: 3.6%, PC: 6.3%) versus surgical patients (HD: 1.5%, PC: 3.0%), but lower than in medical patients (HD: 5.2%, PC: 7.5%). PC rates increased in higher risk patient subgroups and were highest for inpatient HD. Conclusions: In this large study of Medicare patients, HD and PC rates varied significantly among specialties. Trauma patients had higher HD and PC utilization rates than surgical, but lower than medical. The presence of comorbidities, frailty and/or severe traumatic brain injury (in addition to advanced age) may be valuable criteria in selection of trauma patients for hospice and PC services. Further studies are needed to inform the most efficient use of hospice and PC resources, with particular focus on both timing and selection of subgroups most likely to benefit from these valuable yet limited resources. Level of evidence: Level III, therapeutic/care management.

PROPOSED REVISION OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR SURGERY OF TRAUMA RENAL TRAUMA ORGAN INJURY SCALE: SECONDARY ANALYSIS OF THE MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL GENITOURINARY TRAUMA STUDY.

BACKGROUND: This study updates the American Association for Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Organ Injury Scale (OIS) for renal trauma using evidence-based criteria for bleeding control intervention. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a multi-center retrospective study including patients with high grade renal trauma from 7 Level-1 trauma centers from 2013-2018. All eligible patients were assigned new renal trauma grades based on revised criteria. The primary outcome used to measure injury severity was intervention for renal bleeding. Secondary outcomes included intervention for urinary extravasation, units of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) transfused within 24 hours, and mortality. To test the revised grading system, we performed mixed effect logistic regression adjusted for multiple baseline demographic and trauma covariates. We determined the area under the receiver-operator curve (AUC) to assess accuracy of predicting bleeding interventions from the revised grading system and compared this to 2018 AAST organ injury scale. RESULTS: based on the 2018 OIS grading system, we included 549 patients with AAST Grade III-V injuries and CT scans (III: 52% (n = 284), IV: 45% (n = 249), and V: 3% (n = 16)). Among these patients, 89% experienced blunt injury (n = 491) and 12% (n = 64) underwent intervention for bleeding. After applying the revised grading criteria, 60% (n = 329) of patients were downgraded and 4% (n = 23) were upgraded; 2.8% (n = 7) downgraded from grade V to IV, and 69.5% (n = 173) downgraded from IV to III. The revised renal trauma grading system demonstrated improved predictive ability for bleeding interventions (2018 AUC = 0.805, revised AUC = 0.883; p = 0.001) and number of units of PRBCs transfused. When we removed urinary injury from the revised system, there was no difference in its predictive ability for renal hemorrhage intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A revised renal trauma grading system better delineates the need for hemostatic interventions than the current AAST OIS renal trauma grading system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Grade V renal trauma management: results from the multi-institutional genito-urinary trauma study.

PURPOSE: To investigate management trends for American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grade V renal trauma with focus on non-operative management. METHODS: We used prospectively collected data as part of the Multi-institutional Genito-Urinary Trauma Study (MiGUTS). We included patients with grade V renal trauma according to the AAST Injury Scoring Scale 2018 update. All cases submitted by participating centers with radiology images available were independently reviewed to confirm renal trauma grade. Management was classified as expectant, conservative (minimally invasive, endoscopic or percutaneous procedures), or operative (renal-related surgery). RESULTS: Eighty patients were included, 25 of whom had complete imaging and had independent confirmation of AAST grade V renal trauma. Median age was 35 years (Interquartile range (IQR) 25-50) and 23 (92%) had blunt trauma. Ten patients (40%) were managed operatively with nephrectomy. Conservative management was used in nine patients (36%) of which six received angioembolization and three had a stent or drainage tube placed. Expectant management was followed in six (24%) patients. Transfusion requirements were progressively higher with groups requiring more aggressive treatment, and injury characteristics differed significantly across management groups in terms of hematoma size and laceration size. Vascular contrast extravasation was more likely in operatively managed patients though a statistically significant association was not found. CONCLUSION: Successful use of nonoperative management for grade V injuries is used for a substantial subset of patients. Lower transfusion requirement and less severe injury radiologic phenotype appear to be important characteristics delineating this group.

Characterizing Interhospital Variability in Neurosurgical Interventions for Patients with Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Intracranial Hemorrhage.

The objective of this study was to quantify nation-wide interhospital variation in neurosurgical intervention risk by intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) type in the setting of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). This was a retrospective cohort study of adult (≥18 years) trauma patients included in the National Trauma Data Bank from 2007 to 2019 with an emergency department Glasgow Coma Scale score 13-15, diagnosed ICH, no skull fracture. The primary outcome was neurosurgical intervention. Interhospital variation was assessed by examining the best linear unbiased predictors (BLUPs) obtained from mixed-effects logistic regression with random slopes and intercepts for hospitals and covariates for time and 14 demographic, injury, and hospital characteristics; one model per ICH type. Intercept BLUPs are estimates of how different each hospital is from the average hospital (after covariate adjustment). The study population included 49,220 (7%) neurosurgical interventions among 666,842 patients in 1060 hospitals. In 2019, after adjusting for patient case-mix and hospital characteristics, the percentage of hospitals with hemorrhage-specific neurosurgical intervention risk significantly different from the average hospital was as follows: isolated unspecified hemorrhage (0% of 995 hospitals); isolated contusion/laceration (0.54% of 929); isolated epidural hemorrhage (0.39% of 778); isolated subarachnoid hemorrhage (0.10% of 1002); multiple hemorrhages (2.49% of 963); and isolated subdural hemorrhage (16.25% of 1028). In the setting of mTBI, isolated subdural hemorrhages were the only ICH type to have considerable interhospital variability. Causes for this significant variation should be elucidated and might include changing hemorrhage characteristics and practice patterns over time.

Significant National Declines in Neurosurgical Intervention for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury with Intracranial Hemorrhage: A 13-Year Review of the National Trauma Data Bank.

There have been large changes over the past several decades to patient demographics in those presenting with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) with intracranial hemorrhage (ICH; complicated mTBI) with the potential to affect the use of neurosurgical interventions. The objective of this study was to characterize long-term trends of neurosurgical interventions in patients with complicated mTBI using 13 years of the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB). This was a retrospective cohort study of adult (≥18 years) trauma patients included in the NTDB from 2007 to 2019 who had an emergency department Glasgow Coma Scale score 13-15, an intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and no skull fracture. Neurosurgical intervention time trends were quantified for each ICH type using mixed-effects logistic regression with random slopes and intercepts for hospitals, as well as covariates for time and 14 demographic, injury, and hospital characteristics. In total, 666,842 ICH patients across 1060 hospitals were included. The four most common hemorrhages were isolated subdural hemorrhage (36%), isolated subarachnoid hemorrhage (24%), multiple hemorrhage types (24%), and isolated unspecified hemorrhages (9%). Overall, 49,220 (7%) patients received a neurosurgical intervention. After adjustment, the odds of neurosurgical intervention significantly decreased every 10 years by the following odds ratios (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]): 0.85 [0.78, 0.93] for isolated subdural, 0.63 [0.51, 0.77] for isolated subarachnoid, 0.50 [0.41, 0.62] for isolated unspecified, and 0.79 [0.73, 0.86] for multiple hemorrhages. There were no significant temporal trends in neurosurgical intervention odds for isolated epidural hemorrhages (0.87 [0.68, 1.12]) or isolated contusions/lacerations (1.03 [0.75, 1.41]). In the setting of complicated mTBI, the four most common ICH types were associated with significant declines in the odds of neurosurgical intervention over the past decade. It remains unclear whether changing hemorrhage characteristics or practice patterns drove these trends.

Survey of Diagnostic and Management Practices in Small Bowel Obstruction: Individual and Generational Variation Despite Practice Guidelines.

Background: Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common disorder managed by surgeons. Despite extensive publications and management guidelines, there is no universally accepted approach to its diagnosis and management. We conducted a survey of acute care surgeons to elucidate their SBO practice patterns.Methods: A self-report survey of SBO diagnosis and management practices was designed and distributed by email to AAST surgeons who cared for adult SBO patients. Responses were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Chi-square test of independence at α = .05.Results: There were 201 useable surveys: 53% ≥ 50 years, 77% male, 77% at level I trauma centers. Only 35.8% reported formal hospital SBO management guidelines. Computed tomography (CT) scan was the only diagnostic exam listed as "essential" by the majority of respondents (82.6%). Following NG decompression, 153 (76.1%) would "always/frequently" administer a water-soluble contrast challenge (GC). There were notable age differences in approach. Compared to those ≥50 years, younger surgeons were less likely to deem plain abdominal films as "essential" (16.0% vs 40.2%; P < .01) but more likely to require CT scan (88.3% vs 77.6%; P = .045) for diagnosis and to "always/frequently" administer GC (84.0% vs 69.2%; P < .01). Younger surgeons used laparoscopy "frequently" more often than older surgeons (34.0% vs 21.5%, P = .05).Discussion: There is significant variation in diagnosis and management of SBO among respondents in this convenience sample, despite existing PMGs. Novel age differences in responses were observed, which prompts further evaluation. Additional research is needed to determine whether variation in practice patterns is widespread and affects outcomes.

Low Prevalence but High Impact of COVID-19 Positive Status in Adult Trauma Patients: A Multi-institutional Analysis of 28 904 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Few large investigations have addressed the prevalence of COVID-19 infection among trauma patients and impact on providers. The purpose of this study was to quantify the prevalence of COVID-19 infection among trauma patients by timing of diagnosis, assess nosocomial exposure risk, and evaluate the impact of COVID-19 positive status on morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Registry data from adults admitted 4/1/2020-10/31/2020 from 46 level I/II trauma centers were grouped by: timing of first positive status (Day 1, Day 2-6, or Day ≥ 7); overall Positive/Negative status; or Unknown if test results were unavailable. Groups were compared on outcomes (Trauma Quality Improvement Program complications) and mortality using univariate analysis and adjusted logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 28 904 patients (60.7% male, mean age: 56.4, mean injury severity score: 10.5). Of 13 274 (46%) patients with known COVID-19 status, 266 (2%) were Positive Day 1, 119 (1%) Days 2-6, 33 (.2%) Day ≥ 7, and 12 856 (97%) tested Negative. COVID-19 Positive patients had significantly worse outcomes compared to Negative; unadjusted comparisons showed longer hospital length of stay (10.98 vs 7.47;P < .05), higher rates of intensive care unit (57.7% vs 45.7%; P < .05) and ventilation use (22.5% vs 16.9%; P < .05). Adjusted comparisons showed higher rates of acute respiratory distress syndrome (1.7% vs .4%; P < .05) and death (8.1% vs 3.4%; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study conducted during the early pandemic period revealed few trauma patients tested COVID-19 positive, suggesting relatively low exposure risk to care providers. COVID-19 positive status was associated with significantly higher mortality and specific morbidity. Further analysis is needed with consideration for care guidelines specific to COVID-19 positive trauma patients as the pandemic continues.

Adherence to Antibiotic Recommendations and Infection Among Patients With Open Long-Bone Fractures: An Examination of Antibiotic Prioritization in Fracture Management.

Open fractures are at high risk of infection because of exposure of bone and tissue to the environment. Initiation of intravenous antibiotics is recommended within 1 hour of hospital arrival, although the presence of other severe injuries may lead to delays in fracture management. This retrospective study of adult patients with open long-bone fractures admitted to six level 1 trauma centers between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019, aimed to examine adherence to antibiotic recommendations. Associations between receiving recommendation-adherent antibiotics and patient and injury characteristics were investigated univariately and in adjusted regression analyses. The most common fracture locations among the 404 patients included were the tibia (43%) and fibula (26%). Fifty-eight percent of patients received recommendation-adherent antibiotics. After adjustment, patient demographics, comorbidities, cause of injury, and overall injury severity did not show significant associations with adherence to recommendations. Concomitant serious abdominal (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=0.44) and spinal injuries (AOR=0.23) were associated with lower odds of receiving recommendation-adherent antibiotics. Additionally, fractures of certain locations were associated with increased odds of adherence (humerus: AOR=2.78; fibula: AOR=1.64), as were type 3 fractures (AOR=1.55). The overall infection rate was 4%, and adherence to antibiotic recommendations was not associated with infection (3% vs 5% for nonadherent, P=.34). Results suggest that although full recommendation adherence was somewhat low among this patient population, certain injury characteristics were predictive of adherence rates. Current antibiotic recommendations may benefit from consideration of how antibiotic initiation may fit into the prioritization of injury management, especially in patients with polytrauma with other severe injuries. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(1):54-58.].

Validity between self-report and biochemical testing of cannabis and drugs among patients with traumatic injury: brief report.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between drug use and traumatic injury is well documented, yet only a small proportion of patients are biochemically tested for cannabis and other substances. The study objective was to determine whether patient self-report can be used as a proxy for biochemical drug testing following traumatic injury. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis that included 320 patients admitted to four level I trauma centers in Colorado and Texas, primarily involved in motor vehicle crash (89%). If performed, biochemical testing was collected via urine toxicology screen ("tox screen") for cannabis, amphetamines, barbiturates, cocaine, opiates, PCP, and benzodiazepines. All patients were screened for self-reported current drug use, which was evaluated for any drug and specifically for cannabis use. Analyses used to compare results of self-reported drug use and tox screen included sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values, and percent agreement. RESULTS: Among 320 patients, 23% (n = 75) self-reported drug use; cannabis was the most frequently reported drug (n = 63). A tox screen was performed in 59% of patients (n = 190); the proportion of patients who had a tox screen was similar for those self-reporting drug use (60.0%) to those who denied using drugs (59.2%), p = 0.90. Among patients who had a tox screen performed, 18% (n = 35) tested positive for any drug, 12% (n = 22) tested positive for THC, and 7% (n = 13) tested positive for opiates. The percent agreement was 80% for any drug and 81% for cannabis. The specificity was 84-85%, indicating a high likelihood that a patient will not have a positive tox screen if they do not report using drugs. Negative predictive values were 90-95%, indicating a negative self-report correctly identified nearly all patients testing negative on tox screen. Sensitivity was only 60% and positive predictive values were 30-47% for cannabis and drugs, respectively. CONCLUSION: These findings may negate the need for biochemical drug testing in this population, particularly as a "rule out" based on self-reporting. Future studies are needed to confirm these findings and should address risk of selection bias.

An analysis of police transport in an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter trial examining prehospital procedures in penetrating trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Police transport (PT) of penetrating trauma patients in urban locations has become routine in certain metropolitan areas; however, whether it results in improved outcomes over prehospital Advanced life support (ALS) transport has not been determined in a multicenter study. We hypothesized that PT would not result in improved outcomes. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults (18+ years) with penetrating trauma to the torso and/or proximal extremity presenting at 25 urban trauma centers. Police transport and ALS patients were allocated via nearest neighbor, propensity matching. Transport mode also examined by Cox regression. RESULTS: Of 1,618 total patients, 294 (18.2%) had PT and 1,324 (81.8%) were by ALS. After matching, 588 (294/cohort) remained. The patients were primarily Black (n = 497, 84.5%), males (n = 525, 89.3%, injured by gunshot wound (n = 494, 84.0%) with 34.5% (n = 203) having Injury Severity Score of 16 or higher. Overall mortality by propensity matching was not different between cohorts (15.6% ALS vs. 15.0% PT, p = 0.82). In severely injured patients (Injury Severity Score ≥16), mortality did not differ between PT and ALS transport (38.8% vs. 36.0%, respectively; p = 0.68). Cox regression analysis controlled for relevant factors revealed no association with a mortality benefit in patients transported by ALS. CONCLUSION: Police transport of penetrating trauma patients in urban locations results in similar outcomes compared with ALS. Immediate transport to definitive trauma care should be emphasized in this patient population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.

Prehospital end-tidal carbon dioxide is predictive of death and massive transfusion in injured patients: An Eastern Association for Surgery of Trauma multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital identification of the injured patient likely to require emergent care remains a challenge. End-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) has been used in the prehospital setting to monitor respiratory physiology and confirmation of endotracheal tube placement. Low levels of ETCO2 have been demonstrated to correlate with injury severity and mortality in a number of in-hospital studies. We hypothesized that prehospital ETCO2 values would be predictive of mortality and need for massive transfusion (MT) in intubated patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective multicenter trial with 24 participating centers. Prehospital, emergency department, and hospital values were collected. Receiver operating characteristic curves were created and compared. Massive transfusion defined as >10 U of blood in 6 hours or death in 6 hours with at least 1 U of blood transfused. RESULTS: A total of 1,324 patients were enrolled. ETCO2 (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC], 0.67; confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.71) was better in predicting mortality than shock index (SI) (AUROC, 0.55; CI, 0.50-0.60) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) (AUROC, 0.58; CI, 0.53-0.62) (p < 0.0005). Prehospital lowest ETCO2 (AUROC, 0.69; CI, 0.64-0.75), SBP (AUROC, 0.75; CI, 0.70-0.81), and SI (AUROC, 0.74; CI, 0.68-0.79) were all predictive of MT. Analysis of patients with normotension demonstrated lowest prehospital ETCO2 (AUROC, 0.66; CI, 0.61-0.71), which was more predictive of mortality than SBP (AUROC, 0.52; CI, 0.47-0.58) or SI (AUROC, 0.56; CI, 0.50-0.62) (p < 0.001). Lowest prehospital ETCO2 (AUROC, 0.75; CI, 0.65-0.84), SBP (AUROC, 0.63; CI, 0.54-0.74), and SI (AUROC, 0.64; CI, 0.54-0.75) were predictive of MT in normotensive patients. ETCO2 cutoff for MT was 26 mm Hg. The positive predictive value was 16.1%, and negative predictive value was high at 98.1%. CONCLUSION: Prehospital ETCO2 is predictive of mortality and MT. ETCO2 outperformed traditional measures such as SBP and SI in the prediction of mortality. ETCO2 may outperform traditional measures in predicting need for transfusion in occult shock. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic test, level III.

Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multicenter Trial: Comparison of pre-injury antithrombotic use and reversal strategies among severe traumatic brain injury patients.

BACKGROUND: Trauma teams are often faced with patients on antithrombotic (AT) drugs, which is challenging when bleeding occurs. We sought to compare the effects of different AT medications on head injury severity and hypothesized that AT reversal would not improve mortality in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients. METHODS: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma-sponsored prospective, multicentered, observational study of 15 trauma centers was performed. Patient demographics, injury burden, comorbidities, AT agents, and reversal attempts were collected. Outcomes of interest were head injury severity and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Analysis was performed on 2,793 patients. The majority of patients were on aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid [ASA], 46.1%). Patients on a platelet chemoreceptor blocker (P2Y12) had the highest mean Injury Severity Score (9.1 ± 8.1). Patients taking P2Y12 inhibitors ± ASA, and ASA-warfarin had the highest head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) mean (1.2 ± 1.6). On risk-adjusted analysis, warfarin-ASA was associated with a higher head AIS (odds ratio [OR], 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-4.42) after controlling for Injury Severity Score, Charlson Comorbidity Index, initial Glasgow Coma Scale score, and initial systolic blood pressure. Among patients with severe TBI (head AIS score, ≥3) on antiplatelet therapy, reversal with desmopressin (DDAVP) and/or platelet transfusion did not improve survival (82.9% reversal vs. 90.4% none, p = 0.30). In severe TBI patients taking Xa inhibitors who received prothrombin complex concentrate, survival was not improved (84.6% reversal vs. 84.6% none, p = 0.68). With risk adjustment as described previously, mortality was not improved with reversal attempts (antiplatelet agents: OR 0.83; 85% CI, 0.12-5.9 [p = 0.85]; Xa inhibitors: OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.12-4.64; p = 0.77). CONCLUSION: Reversal attempts appear to confer no mortality benefit in severe TBI patients on antiplatelet agents or Xa inhibitors. Combination therapy was associated with severity of head injury among patients taking preinjury AT therapy, with ASA-warfarin possessing the greatest risk. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level II.

Nephrectomy After High-Grade Renal Trauma is Associated With Higher Mortality: Results From the Multi-Institutional Genitourinary Trauma Study (MiGUTS).

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that undergoing nephrectomy after high-grade renal trauma is associated with higher mortality rates. METHODS: We gathered data from 21 Level-1 trauma centers through the Multi-institutional Genito-Urinary Trauma Study. Patients with high-grade renal trauma were included. We assessed the association between nephrectomy and mortality in all patients and in subgroups of patients after excluding those who died within 24 hours of hospital arrival and those with GCS≤8. We controlled for age, injury severity score (ISS), shock (systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg), and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS). RESULTS: A total of 1181 high-grade renal trauma patients were included. Median age was 31 and trauma mechanism was blunt in 78%. Injuries were graded as III, IV, and V in 55%, 34%, and 11%, respectively. There were 96 (8%) mortalities and 129 (11%) nephrectomies. Mortality was higher in the nephrectomy group (21.7% vs 6.5%, P <.001). Those who died were older, had higher ISS, lower GCS, and higher rates of shock. After adjusting for patient and injury characteristics nephrectomy was still associated with higher risk of death (RR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.26-2.55). CONCLUSION: Nephrectomy was associated with higher mortality in the acute trauma setting even when controlling for shock, overall injury severity, and head injury. These results may have implications in decision making in acute trauma management for patients not in extremis from renal hemorrhage.

The Impact of Nursing on Trauma Patient Satisfaction: An Analysis of HCAHPS From 112,283 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of patient satisfaction is central to understanding and improving system performance with the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) national standard survey. However, no large, multi-institutional study exists, which examines the role of nurses in trauma patient satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of nurses on trauma patient satisfaction. METHODS: This retrospective, descriptive study of Level I-IV trauma centers in a multistate hospital system evaluated patients 18 years and older admitted with at least an overnight stay. Data were obtained electronically for patients discharged in 2018-2019 who returned an HCAHPS survey. Surveys were linked by an honest broker to demographic and injury data from the trauma registry, and then anonymized prior to analysis. Patients were categorized as "trauma" per the National Trauma Data Standard (NTDS) definition or as "medical" or "surgical" per the HCAHPS definition. RESULTS: Of 112,283 surveys from 89 trauma centers, "trauma" patients (n = 5,126) comprised 4.6%, "surgical" 39.0% (n = 43,763), and "medical" 56.5% (n = 63,394). Nurses had an overwhelming impact on "trauma" patient satisfaction, accounting for 63.9% (p < .001) of the variation (adjusted R2) in the overall score awarded the institution-larger than for "surgery" (59.6%; p < .001) or "medical" (58.4%; p < .001) patients. The most important individual domain contributor to the overall rating of a facility was "nursing communication." CONCLUSIONS: The magnitude of the effect of trauma nurses was noteworthy, with their communication ability being the single biggest driver of institutional ratings. These data provide insight for future performance benchmark development and emphasize the critical impact of trauma nurses on the trauma patient experience.

Multicenter study of US trauma centers examining the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on injury causes, diagnoses and procedures.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in nationwide social distancing and shelter-in-place orders meant to curb transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The effect of the pandemic on injury patterns has not been well described in the USA. The study objective is to determine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the distribution and determinants of traumatic injuries. METHODS: This retrospective multi-institutional cohort study included all hospital admissions for acute traumatic injury at six community level I trauma centers. Descriptive statistics were used to compare injury causes, diagnoses and procedures over two similar time periods: prepandemic (March 11-June 30, 2019) and pandemic (March 11-June 30, 2020). RESULTS: There were 7308 trauma patients included: 3862 (53%) prepandemic and 3446 (47%) during the pandemic. Cause of injury significantly differed by period (p<0.001). During the pandemic, there were decreases in motor vehicle crashes (from 17.0% to 14.0%, p<0.001), worksite injuries (from 5.2% to 4.1%, p=0.02), pedestrian injuries (from 3.0% to 2.2%, p=0.02) and recreational injuries (from 3.0% to 1.7%, p<0.001), while there were significant increases in assaults (6.9% to 8.5%, p=0.01), bicycle crashes (2.8% to 4.2%, p=0.001) and off-road vehicle injuries (1.8% to 3.0%, p<0.001). There was no change by study period in falls, motorcycle injuries, crush/strikes, firearm and self-inflicted injuries, and injuries associated with home-improvement projects. Injury diagnoses differed between time periods; during the pandemic, there were more injury diagnoses to the head (23.0% to 27.3%, p<0.001) and the knee/leg (11.7% to 14.9%, p<0.001). There were also increases in medical/surgical procedures (57.5% to 61.9%, p<0.001), administration of therapeutics/blood products (31.4% to 34.2%, p=0.01) and monitoring (11.0% to 12.9%, p=0.01). DISCUSSION: Causes of traumatic injury, diagnoses, and procedures were significantly changed by the pandemic. Trauma centers must adjust to meet the changing demands associated with altered injury patterns, as they were associated with increased use of hospital resources. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III (epidemiological).

An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter trial examining prehospital procedures in penetrating trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital procedures (PHP) by emergency medical services (EMS) are performed regularly in penetrating trauma patients despite previous studies demonstrating no benefit. We sought to examine the influence of PHPs on outcomes in penetrating trauma patients in urban locations where transport to trauma center is not prolonged. We hypothesized that patients without PHPs would have better outcomes than those undergoing PHP. METHODS: This was an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma-sponsored, multicenter, prospective, observational trial of adults (18+ years) with penetrating trauma to the torso and/or proximal extremity presenting at 25 urban trauma centers. The impact of PHPs and transport mechanism on in-hospital mortality were examined. RESULTS: Of 2,284 patients included, 1,386 (60.7%) underwent PHP. The patients were primarily Black (n = 1,527, 66.9%) males (n = 1,986, 87.5%) injured by gunshot wound (n = 1,510, 66.0%) with 34.1% (n = 726) having New Injury Severity Score of ≥16. A total of 1,427 patients (62.5%) were transported by Advanced Life Support EMS, 17.2% (n = 392) by private vehicle, 13.7% (n = 312) by police, and 6.7% (n = 153) by Basic Life Support EMS. Of the PHP patients, 69.1% received PHP on scene, 59.9% received PHP in route, and 29.0% received PHP both on scene and in route. Initial scene vitals differed between groups, but initial emergency department vitals did not. Receipt of ≥1 PHP increased mortality odds (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.83; p = 0.04). Logistic regression showed increased mortality with each PHP, whether on scene or during transport. Subset analysis of specific PHP revealed that intubation (OR, 10.76; 95% CI, 4.02-28.78; p < 0.001), C-spine immobilization (OR, 5.80; 95% CI, 1.85-18.26; p < 0.01), and pleural decompression (OR, 3.70; 95% CI, 1.33-10.28; p = 0.01) had the highest odds of mortality after adjusting for multiple variables. CONCLUSION: Prehospital procedures in penetrating trauma patients impart no survival advantage and may be harmful in urban settings, even when performed during transport. Therefore, PHP should be forgone in lieu of immediate transport to improve patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level III.

Decreased adult trauma admission volumes and changing injury patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic at 85 trauma centers in a multistate healthcare system.

BACKGROUND: Reports indicate social distancing guidelines and other effects of the COVID-19 pandemic impacted trauma patient volumes and injury patterns. This report is the first analysis of a large trauma network describing the extent of these impacts. The objective of this study was to describe the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient volumes, demographics, injury characteristics, and outcomes. METHODS: For this descriptive, multicenter study from a large, multistate hospital network, data were collected from the system-wide centralized trauma registry and retrospectively reviewed to retrieve patient information including volume, demographics, and outcomes. For comparison, patient data from January through May of 2020 and January through May of 2019 were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 12 395 trauma patients (56% men, 79% white, mean age 59 years) from 85 trauma centers were included. The first 5 months of 2020 revealed a substantial decrease in volume, which began in February and continued into June. Further analysis revealed an absolute decrease of 32.5% in patient volume in April 2020 compared with April 2019 (4997 from 7398; p<0.0001). Motor vehicle collisions decreased 49.7% (628 from 1249). There was a statistically significant increase in injury severity score (9.0 vs. 8.3; p<0.001). As a proportion of the total trauma population, blunt injuries decreased 3.1% (87.3 from 90.5) and penetrating injuries increased 2.7% (10.0 from 7.3; p<0.001). A significant increase was found in the proportion of patients who did not survive to discharge (3.6% vs. 2.8%; p=0.010; absolute decrease: 181 from 207). DISCUSSION: Early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with a 32.5% decrease in trauma patient volumes and altered injury patterns at 85 trauma centers in a multistate system. This preliminary observational study describes the initial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and warrants further investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II (therapeutic/care management).

Critical Role of Trauma and Emergency Surgery Physicians in Patient Satisfaction: An Analysis of Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems, Hospital Version Data from 186,779 Patients and 168 Hospitals in a National Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: Trauma and emergency surgery patients are unique with regard to the sudden and unexpected nature of their hospitalization and this can adversely affect patient satisfaction, but, to our knowledge, no large study exists examining this issue. The purpose of this study was to investigate the major factors that affect satisfaction scores in trauma and emergency surgery patients. STUDY DESIGN: Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems, Hospital Version survey data from patients discharged in 2018-2019 from facilities in a national hospital system were obtained. Patients were categorized as trauma, emergency surgery, or direct admit surgery (elective surgery). Individual Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems, Hospital Version question scores were regressed on the score for "overall rating" to determine the primary, secondary, and tertiary satisfaction drivers. RESULTS: There were 186,779 patients from 168 hospitals included. As expected, the primary determinant of patient satisfaction was nursing communication for all groups. However, trauma and emergency surgery patients differed from elective surgery patients in that physician communication was the second most important factor in patient satisfaction, accounting for 12.0% (trauma) and 8.6% (emergency surgery) of the total variability in the overall rating beyond the variability explained by the primary driver. If physician communication received low ratings, it was unlikely that high scores in other metrics could compensate to bring the overall score above the 50th percentile. CONCLUSIONS: Acute care surgeons appear to play a uniquely important role in support of Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems, Hospital Version scores. These data emphasize the importance of physician communication, particularly when a prehospital physician-patient relationship does not exist. Future research should explore specific mechanisms by which physicians effectively communicate with patients.

Clinical and Radiographic Factors Associated With Failed Renal Angioembolization: Results From the Multi-institutional Genitourinary Trauma Study (Mi-GUTS).

OBJECTIVE: To find clinical or radiographic factors that are associated with angioembolization failure after high-grade renal trauma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients were selected from the Multi-institutional Genito-Urinary Trauma Study. Included were patients who initially received renal angioembolization after high-grade renal trauma (AAST grades III-V). This cohort was dichotomized into successful or failed angioembolization. Angioembolization was considered a failure if angioembolization was followed by repeat angiography and/or an exploratory laparotomy. RESULTS: A total of 67 patients underwent management initially with angioembolization, with failure in 18 (27%) patients. Those with failed angioembolization had a larger proportion ofgrade IV (72% vs 53%) and grade V (22% vs 12%) renal injuries. A total of 53 patients underwent renal angioembolization and had initial radiographic data for review, with failure in 13 cases. The failed renal angioembolization group had larger perirenal hematoma sizes on the initial trauma scan. CONCLUSION: Angioembolization after high-grade renal trauma failed in 27% of patients. Failed angioembolization was associated with higher injury grade and a larger perirenal hematoma. Likely these characteristics are associated with high-grade renal trauma that may be less amenable to successful treatment after a single renal angioembolization.

Colorectal resection in emergency general surgery: An EAST multicenter trial.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence comparing stoma creation (STM) versus anastomosis after urgent or emergent colorectal resection is limited. This study examined outcomes after colorectal resection in emergency general surgery patients. METHODS: This was an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma-sponsored prospective observational multicenter study of patients undergoing urgent/emergent colorectal resection. Twenty-one centers enrolled patients for 11 months. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were recorded. χ, Mann-Whitney U test, and multivariable logistic regression models were used to describe outcomes and risk factors for surgical complication/mortality. RESULTS: A total of 439 patients were enrolled (ANST, 184; STM, 255). The median (interquartile range) age was 62 (53-71) years, and the median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was 4 (1-6). The most common indication for surgery was diverticulitis (28%). Stoma group was older (64 vs. 58 years, p < 0.001), had a higher CCI, and were more likely to be immunosuppressed. Preoperatively, STM patients were more likely to be intubated (57 vs. 15, p < 0.001), on vasopressors (61 vs. 13, p < 0.001), have pneumoperitoneum (131 vs. 41, p < 0.001) or fecal contamination (114 vs. 33, p < 0.001), and had a higher incidence of elevated lactate (149 vs. 67, p < 0.001). Overall mortality was 13%, which was higher in STM patients (18% vs. 8%, p = 0.02). Surgical complications were more common in STM patients (35% vs. 25%, p = 0.02). On multivariable analysis, management with an open abdomen, intraoperative blood transfusion, and larger hospital size were associated with development of a surgical complication, while CCI, preoperative vasopressor use, steroid use, open abdomen, and intraoperative blood transfusion were independently associated with mortality. CONCLUSION: This study highlights a tendency to perform fecal diversion in patients who are acutely ill at presentation. There is a higher morbidity and mortality rate in STM patients. Independent predictors of mortality include CCI, preoperative vasopressor use, steroid use, open abdomen, and intraoperative blood transfusion. Following adjustment by clinical factors, method of colon management was not associated with surgical complications or mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level IV.