A crew resource management program tailored to trauma resuscitation improves team behavior and communication.

BACKGROUND: Crew Resource Management (CRM) is a team-building communication process first implemented in the aviation industry to improve safety. It has been used in health care, particularly in surgical and intensive care settings, to improve team dynamics and reduce errors. We adapted a CRM process for implementation in the trauma resuscitation area. STUDY DESIGN: An interdisciplinary steering committee developed our CRM process to include a didactic classroom program based on a preimplementation survey of our trauma team members. Implementation with new cultural and process expectations followed. The Human Factors Attitude Survey and Communication and Teamwork Skills assessment tool were used to design, evaluate, and validate our CRM program. RESULTS: The initial trauma communication survey was completed by 160 team members (49% response). Twenty-five trauma resuscitations were observed and scored using Communication and Teamwork Skills. Areas of concern were identified and 324 staff completed our 3-hour CRM course during a 3-month period. After CRM training, 132 communication surveys and 38 Communication and Teamwork Skills observations were completed. In the post-CRM survey, respondents indicated improvement in accuracy of field to medical command information (p = 0.029); accuracy of emergency department medical command information to the resuscitation area (p = 0.002); and team leader identity, communication of plan, and role assignment (p = 0.001). After CRM training, staff were more likely to speak up when patient safety was a concern (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Crew Resource Management in the trauma resuscitation area enhances team dynamics, communication, and, ostensibly, patient safety. Philosophy and culture of CRM should be compulsory components of trauma programs and in resuscitation of injured patients.

Screening for blunt cardiac injury: an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guideline.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing blunt cardiac injury (BCI) can be difficult. Many patients with mechanism for BCI are admitted to the critical care setting based on associated injuries; however, debate surrounds those patients who are hemodynamically stable and do not otherwise require a higher level of care. To allow safe discharge home or admission to a nonmonitored setting, BCI should be definitively ruled out in those at risk. METHODS: This Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) practice management guideline (PMG) updates the original from 1998. English-language citations were queried for BCI from March 1997 through December 2011, using the PubMed Entrez interface. Of 599 articles identified, prospective or retrospective studies examining BCI were selected. Each article was reviewed by two members of the EAST BCI PMG workgroup. Data were collated, and a consensus was obtained for the recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 35 institutional studies evaluating the diagnosis of adult patients with suspected BCI. This PMG has 10 total recommendations, including two Level 2 updates, two upgrades from Level 3 to Level 2, and three new recommendations. CONCLUSION: Electrocardiogram (ECG) alone is not sufficient to rule out BCI. Based on four studies showing that the addition of troponin I to ECG improved the negative predictive value to 100%, we recommend obtaining an admission ECG and troponin I from all patients in whom BCI is suspected. BCI can be ruled out only if both ECG result and troponin I level are normal, a significant change from the previous guideline. Patients with new ECG changes and/or elevated troponin I should be admitted for monitoring. Echocardiogram is not beneficial as a screening tool for BCI and should be reserved for patients with hypotension and/or arrhythmias. The presence of a sternal fracture alone does not predict BCI. Cardiac computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging can be used to differentiate acute myocardial infarction from BCI in trauma patients.

Clinical practice guideline: red blood cell transfusion in adult trauma and critical care.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a clinical practice guideline for red blood cell transfusion in adult trauma and critical care. DESIGN: Meetings, teleconferences and electronic-based communication to achieve grading of the published evidence, discussion and consensus among the entire committee members. METHODS: This practice management guideline was developed by a joint taskforce of EAST (Eastern Association for Surgery of Trauma) and the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) of the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM). We performed a comprehensive literature review of the topic and graded the evidence using scientific assessment methods employed by the Canadian and U.S. Preventive Task Force (Grading of Evidence, Class I, II, III; Grading of Recommendations, Level I, II, III). A list of guideline recommendations was compiled by the members of the guidelines committees for the two societies. Following an extensive review process by external reviewers, the final guideline manuscript was reviewed and approved by the EAST Board of Directors, the Board of Regents of the ACCM and the Council of SCCM. RESULTS: Key recommendations are listed by category, including (A) Indications for RBC transfusion in the general critically ill patient; (B) RBC transfusion in sepsis; (C) RBC transfusion in patients at risk for or with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome; (D) RBC transfusion in patients with neurologic injury and diseases; (E) RBC transfusion risks; (F) Alternatives to RBC transfusion; and (G) Strategies to reduce RBC transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based recommendations regarding the use of RBC transfusion in adult trauma and critical care will provide important information to critical care practitioners.

Hepatic dysfunction increases length of stay and risk of death after injury.

BACKGROUND: The relative importance of dysfunction or failure of different organ systems to recovery from critical illness is unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the contribution of hepatic dysfunction to outcome after injury. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients admitted to our trauma center from 1994 to 1998 for the development of hepatic dysfunction, defined as serum bilirubin > or = 2.0 mg/dL. Additional variables on patient demographics, injuries, hospital course, and development of other organ system dysfunction were collected from the trauma registry and hospital records. RESULTS: Using logistic regression analysis, hepatic dysfunction was significantly associated with increased intensive care unit length of stay (LOS) and death. The added development of hepatic dysfunction significantly increased LOS in patients with no other organ dysfunction, those with renal dysfunction, and those with respiratory dysfunction. CONCLUSION: Hepatic dysfunction influences recovery after injury independent of the dysfunction of other organ systems. The development of hepatic dysfunction prolongs LOS and increases mortality.