Trends in youth risk behaviours and firearm injury in the USA over 20 years.

BACKGROUND: Firearm injuries are the leading cause of death in children and adolescents in the USA. We hypothesised that high rates of risky behaviour in high school students are associated with firearm injury and death in this population. METHODS: We obtained data from the Youth Behaviour Risk Survey of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and combined it with data from the CDC Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System, CDC Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research and American Community Survey, 2001-2020. We examined trends over time using a non-parametric test for trends. RESULTS: The percentage of high school-aged youth carrying a weapon in the preceding 30 days ranged from 13.2% in 2019 to 18.5% in 2005, without a statistically significant trend over time (p=0.051). Those carrying a weapon to school peaked at 6.5% in 2005 and steadily downtrended to 2.8% in 2019 (p=0.004). Boys consistently reported higher rates of weapon carriage, with white boys reporting higher rates than black boys. Firearm homicides among adolescents 14-18 years showed no significant change, ranging from 4.0 per 100k in 2013 to 8.3 per 100k in 2020. This varied considerably by sex and race, with black boys suffering a rate of nearly 60 per 100 000 in 2020 and white girls rarely exceeding 1/100 000 during the study period. CONCLUSION: Self-reported weapon carriage among teens in the USA has steadily downtrended over time. However, shooting injuries and deaths have not. While the former suggests progress, the latter remains concerning. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III; retrospective cohort study.

The open abdomen in mesenteric ischemia: A tool for patients undergoing revascularization.

BACKGROUND: We examined outcomes in Acute Mesenteric Ischemia (AMI) with the hypothesis that Open Abdomen (OA) is associated with decreased mortality. METHODS: We performed a cohort study reviewing NSQIP emergency laparotomy patients, 2016-2020, with a postoperative diagnosis of mesenteric ischemia. OA was defined using flags for patients without fascial closure. Logistic regression was used with outcomes of 30-day mortality and several secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 5514 cases, 4624 (83.9%) underwent resection and 387 (7.0%) underwent revascularization. The OA rate was 32.6%. 10.8% of patients who were closed required reoperation. After adjustment for demographics, transfer status, comorbidities, preoperative variables including creatinine, white blood cell count, and anemia, as well as operative time, OA was associated with OR 1.58 for mortality (95% CI [1.38, 1.81], p < 0.001). Among revascularizations, there was no such association (p = 0.528). OA was associated with ventilator support >48 h (OR 4.04, 95% CI [3.55, 4.62], and p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: OA in AMI was associated with increased mortality and prolonged ventilation. This is not so in revascularization patients, and 1 in 10 patients who underwent primary closure required reoperation. OA should be considered in specific cases of AMI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective cohort, Level III.

Hemodynamic Deterioration of Trauma Patients Undergoing Interhospital Transfer.

INTRODUCTION: Organized trauma systems reduce morbidity and mortality after serious injury. Rapid transport to high-level trauma centers is ideal, but not always feasible. Thus, interhospital transfers are an important component of trauma systems. However, transferring a seriously injured patient carries the risk of worsening condition before reaching definitive care. In this study, we evaluated characteristics and outcomes of patients whose hemodynamic status worsened during the transfer process. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study database from 2011 to 2018. Patients were included if they had a heart rate ≤ 100 and systolic blood pressure ≥ 100 at presentation to the referring hospital and were transferred within 24 h. We defined hemodynamic deterioration (HDD) as admitting heart rate > 100 or systolic blood pressure < 100 at the receiving center. We compared demographics, mechanism of injury, injury severity, management, and outcomes between patients with and without HDD using descriptive statistics and multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 52,919 included patients, 5331 (10.1%) had HDD. HDD patients were more often moderately-severely injured (injury severity score 9-15; 40.4% versus 39.4%, P < 0.001) and injured via motor vehicle collision (23.2% versus 16.6%, P < 0.001) or gunshot wound (2.1% versus 1.3%, P < 0.001). HDD patients more often had extremity or torso injuries and after transfer were more likely to be transferred to the intensive care unit (35% versus 28.5%, P < 0.001), go directly to surgery (8.4% versus 5.9%, P < 0.001), or interventional radiology (0.8% versus 0.3%, P < 0.001). Overall mortality in the HDD group was 4.9% versus 2.1% in the group who remained stable. These results were confirmed using multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Interhospital transfers are essential in trauma, but one in 10 transferred patients deteriorated hemodynamically in that process. This high-risk component of the trauma system requires close attention to the important aspects of transfer such as patient selection, pretransfer management/stabilization, and communication between facilities.

The role of emergency department thoracotomy in patients with cranial gunshot wounds.

BACKGROUND: Although several society guidelines exist regarding emergency department thoracotomy (EDT), there is a lack of data upon which to base guidance for multiple gunshot wound (GSW) patients whose injuries include a cranial GSW. We hypothesized that survival in these patients would be exceedingly low. METHODS: We used Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study data, 2002 to 2021, and included EDTs for GSWs. We defined EDT by International Classification of Diseases codes for thoracotomy or procedures requiring one, with a location flagged as emergency department. We defined head injuries as any head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score of ≥1 and severe head injuries as head AIS score of ≥4. Head injuries were "isolated" if all other body regions have an AIS score of <2. Descriptive statistics were performed. Discharge functional status was measured in five domains. RESULTS: Over 20 years in Pennsylvania, 3,546 EDTs were performed; 2,771 (78.1%) were for penetrating injuries. Most penetrating EDTs (2,003 [72.3%]) had suffered GSWs. Survival among patients with isolated head wounds (n = 25) was 0%. Survival was 5.3% for the non-head injured (n = 94 of 1,787). In patients with combined head and other injuries, survival was driven by the severity of the head wound-0% (0 of 81) with a severe head injury ( p = 0.035 vs. no severe head injury) and 4.5% (5 of 110) with a nonsevere head injury. Of the five head-injured survivors, two were fully dependent for transfer mobility, and three were partially or fully dependent for locomotion. Of 211 patients with a cranial injury who expired, 2 (0.9%) went on to organ donation. CONCLUSION: Although there is clearly no role for EDT in patients with isolated head GSWs, EDT may be considered in patients with combined injuries, as most of these patients have minor head injuries and survival is not different from the non-head injured. However, if a severe head injury is clinically apparent, even in the presence of other body cavity injuries, EDT should not be pursued. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Effects of prior injury on long term patient reported outcomes after trauma.

BACKGROUND: Trauma is an episodic, chronic disease with substantial, long-term physical, psychological, emotional, and social impacts. However, the effect of recurrent trauma on these long-term outcomes remains unknown. We hypothesized that trauma patients with a history of prior traumatic injury (PTI) would have poorer outcomes 6 months (6mo) after injury compared with patients without PTI. METHODS: Adult trauma patients admitted at an urban, academic, Level I trauma center were screened for inclusion (October 2020 to November 2021). Enrolled patients were administered the PROMIS-29 instrument, the primary care post-traumatic stress disorder screen, and standardized questions about prior trauma hospitalization, substance use, employment, and living situation at baseline and 6mo after injury. Assessment data was merged with clinical registry data, and outcomes were compared with respect to PTI. RESULTS: Of 3,794 eligible patients, 456 completed baseline assessments and 92 completed 6mo surveys. Between those with or without PTI, there were no differences at 6mo after injury in the proportion of patients reporting poor function in social participation, anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain interference, or sleep disturbance. Prior traumatic injury patients reported poor physical function less often than patients without PTI (10 [27.0%] vs. 33 [60.0%], p = 0.002). After controlling for age, gender, race, injury mechanism, and Injury Severity Score, PTI correlated with a fourfold decrease in poor physical function risk (adjusted odds ratio, 0.243; 95% confidence interval, 0.081-0.733; p = 0.012) in the multivariable logistic regression model. CONCLUSION: Compared with patients suffering their first injury, trauma patients with PTI have better self-reported physical function after a subsequent injury and otherwise equivalent outcomes across a range of HRQoL domains at 6mo. There remains substantial room for improvement to mitigate the long-term challenges faced by trauma patients and to facilitate their societal reintegration, regardless of the number of times they are injured. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

A tale of two cities: Policing and firearm homicides in Boston and Philadelphia.

BACKGROUND: Recent political movements have raised questions about the effectiveness of police funding, but the impact of law enforcement budgets on firearm violence is unknown. We hypothesized that department funding and measures of police activity would be associated with decreased shootings and firearm homicides (FHs) in two major cities with different police funding patterns. METHODS: We collected data from the following sources: district attorney's offices, police departments, Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reporting program, the Centers for Disease Control, the Annual Survey of Public Employment and Payroll, and the American Community Survey. Data included demographics, police department budgets, number of officers, homicide clearance rates, firearms recovered, shootings, and FHs, 2015 to 2020. Totals were normalized to population and number of shootings. We used panel linear regression to measure associations between policing variables, shootings, and FHs while adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Firearm homicides significantly increased in Philadelphia. In Boston, the trend was less clear, although there was an increase in 2020. Police budget normalized to shootings trended toward a decrease in Philadelphia and an increase in Boston. The number of firearms recovered annually appeared to increase in Boston but peaked midstudy in Philadelphia. In multivariable analyses, police budget was associated with neither shootings nor FHs. However, increased firearm recovery was associated with lower shooting ( ß = -0.0004, p = 0.022) and FH ( ß = -0.00005, p = 0.004) rates. CONCLUSION: Philadelphia and Boston demonstrated differences in police funding, 2015 to 2020. While budget is not associated with shootings or FHs, firearm recovery is suggesting that removal of firearms from circulation remains key. The impact this has on vulnerable populations requires further investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

National Cohort Study of Resource Utilization in Older Adults With Emergency General Surgery Conditions.

INTRODUCTION: Prior studies have sought to describe Emergency General Surgery (EGS) burden, but a detailed description of resource utilization for both operative and nonoperative management of EGS conditions has not been undertaken. METHODS: Patient and hospital characteristics were extracted from Medicare data, 2015-2018. Operations, nonsurgical procedures, and other resources (i.e., radiology) were defined using Current Procedural Terminology codes. RESULTS: One million eight hundred two thousand five hundred forty-five patients were included in the cohort. The mean age was 74.7 y and the most common diagnoses were upper gastrointestinal. The majority of hospitals were metropolitan (75.1%). Therapeutic radiology services were available in 78.4% of hospitals and operating rooms or endoscopy suites were available in 92.5% of hospitals. There was variability in resource utilization across EGS subconditions, with hepatobiliary (26.4%) and obstruction (23.9%) patients most frequently undergoing operation. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of EGS diseases in older adults involves several interventional resources. Changes in EGS models, acute care surgery training, and interhospital care coordination may be beneficial to the treatment of EGS patients.

Funding the war in America: A look in the mirror.

BACKGROUND: Health care political action committees (HPACs) historically contribute more to candidates opposing firearm restrictions (FRs), clashing with their affiliated medical societies. These societies have increasingly emphasized the prevention of firearm violence and it is not known if recent contributions by their HPACs have aligned with their stated goals. We hypothesized that such HPACs still contribute similar amounts toward legislators up for reelection opposing FR. METHODS: We identified HPACs of medical societies endorsing one or both calls-to-action against firearm violence published in the Annals of Internal Medicine (2015, 2019). House of Representatives (HOR) votes on H.R.8, a background checks bill, were characterized from GovTrack. We compiled HPAC contributions between the H.R.8 vote and election to HOR members up for re-election from the National Institute on Money in Politics. Our primary outcome was total campaign contributions by H.R.8 stance. Secondary outcomes included percentage of politicians funded and total contributions. RESULTS: Nineteen societies endorsed one or both call-to-action articles. Three hundred eighty-five of 430 HOR members ran for reelection in 2020. Those endorsing H.R.8 (n = 226, 59%) received $2.8 M for $4,750 (interquartile range [IQR], $1000-$15,500) per candidate. Those opposing (n = 159, 41%) received $1.5 M for $2,500 (IQR, $0-$11,000) per candidate ( p = 0.0057). Health care political action committees donated toward a median of 20% (IQR, 7-28) of candidates endorsing H.R.8 and 9% (IQR, 4-22) of candidates opposing H.R.8 ( p = 0.0014). Those endorsing H.R.8 received 1,585 total contributions for a median of 3 (IQR, 1-10) contributions per candidate, while those opposing received 834 total contributions for a median of 2 (IQR, 0-7) contributions per candidate ( p = 0.0029). CONCLUSION: Politicians voting against background checks received substantial contributions toward reelection from the HPACs of societies advocating for firearm restrictions. However, this is the first study to suggest that HPAC's contributions have become more congruent with their respective societies. Further alignment of medical society goals and their HPAC political contributions could have a profound impact on firearm violence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Higher center volume is significantly associated with lower mortality in trauma patients with shock.

INTRODUCTION: Injured patients presenting in shock are at high risk of mortality despite numerous efforts to improve resuscitation. Identifying differences in outcomes among centers for this population could yield insights to improve performance. We hypothesized that trauma centers treating higher volumes of patients in shock would have lower risk-adjusted mortality. METHODS: We queried the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study from 2016 to 2018 for injured patients ≥16 years of age at Level I&II trauma centers who had an initial systolic blood pressure (SBP) of <90 mmHg. We excluded patients with critical head injury (abbreviated injury score [AIS] head ≥5) and patients coming from centers with a shock patient volume of ≤10 for the study period. The primary exposure was tertile of center-level shock patient volume (low, medium, or high volume). We compared risk-adjusted mortality by tertile of volume using multivariable Cox proportional hazards model incorporating age, injury severity, mechanism, and physiology. RESULTS: Of 1,805 included patients at 29 centers, 915 (50.7%) died. The median annual shock trauma patient volume was 9 patients for low volume centers, medium 19.5, and high 37. Median ISS was higher at high volume compared to low volume centers (22 vs 18, p <0.001). Raw mortality was 54.9% at high volume centers, 46.7% for medium, and 42.9% for low. Time elapsed from arrival to emergency department (ED) to the operating room (OR) was lower at high volume than low volume centers (median 47 vs 78 min) p = 0.003. In adjusted analysis, hazard ratio for high volume centers (referenced to low volume) was 0.76 (95% CI 0.59-0.97, p = 0.030). CONCLUSION: After adjusting for patient physiology and injury characteristics, center-level volume is significantly associated with mortality. Future studies should seek to identify key practices associated with improved outcomes in high-volume centers. Furthermore, shock patient volume should be considered when new trauma centers are opened.

The variable role of damage control laparotomy over 19 years of trauma care in Pennsylvania.

BACKGROUND: Damage control laparotomy emphasizes physiologic stabilization of critically injured patients and allows staged surgical management. However, there is little consensus on the optimal criteria for damage control laparotomy. We examined variability between centers and over time in Pennsylvania. METHODS: We analyzed the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study data between 2000 and 2018, excluding centers performing <10 laparotomies/year. Laparotomy was defined using International Classification of Diseases codes, and damage control laparotomy was defined by a code for "reopening of recent laparotomy" or a return to the operating room >4 hours from index laparotomy that was not unplanned. We examined trends over time and by center. Multivariable logistic regression models were developed to predict both damage control laparotomy and mortality, generate observed:expected ratios, and identify outliers for each. We compared risk-adjusted mortality rates to center-level damage control laparotomy rates. RESULTS: In total, 18,896 laparotomies from 22 centers were analyzed; 3,549 damage control laparotomies were performed (18.8% of all laparotomies). The use of damage control laparotomy in Pennsylvania varied from 13.9% to 22.8% over time. There was wide variation in center-level use of damage control laparotomy, from 11.1% to 29.4%, despite adjustment. Factors associated with damage control laparotomy included injury severity and admission vital signs. Center identity improved the model as demonstrated by likelihood ratio test (P < .001), suggesting differences in center-level practices. There was minimal correlation between center-level damage control laparotomy use and mortality. CONCLUSION: There is wide center-level variation in the use of damage control laparotomy among centers, despite adjustment for patient factors. Damage control laparotomy is both resource intensive and highly morbid; regional resources should be allocated to address this substantial practice variation to optimize damage control laparotomy use.

The traveling pelvic bullet: a case of retrograde ballistic migration through the venous system.

Migration of a ballistic missile through the vasculature is rare but important to recognize. It can lead to diagnostic confusion and seemingly unexplainable bullet trajectories. We have described the case of a young man with a gunshot wound to the axillary vein and initial embolus to the inferior vena cava. The bullet subsequently migrated to the right common iliac vein, allowing for straightforward retrieval.

Change in outcomes for trauma patients over time: Two decades of a state trauma system.

BACKGROUND: Trauma center mortality rates are benchmarked to expected rates of death based on patient and injury characteristics. The expected mortality rate is recalculated from pooled outcomes across a trauma system each year, obscuring system-level change across years. We hypothesized that risk-adjusted mortality would decrease over time within a state-wide trauma system. METHODS: We identified adult trauma patients presenting to Level I and II Pennsylvania trauma centers, 1999-2018, using the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study. Multivariable logistic regression generated risk-adjusted models for mortality in all patients, and in key subgroups: penetrating torso injury, blunt multisystem trauma, and patients presenting in shock. RESULTS: Of 162,646 included patients, 123,518 (76.1%) were white and 108,936 (67.0%) were male. The median age was 49 (interquartile range [IQR] 29-70), median injury severity score was 16 (IQR 10-24), and 87.5% of injuries were blunt. Overall, 9.9% of patients died, and compared to 1999, no year had significantly higher adjusted odds of mortality. Overall mortality was significantly lower in 2007-2009 and 2011-2018. Of patients with blunt, multisystem injuries, 17.7% died, and adjusted mortality improved over time. Mortality rates were 24.9% for penetrating torso injury, and 56.9% for shock, with no significant change. Mortality improved for patients with ISS < 25, but not for the most severely injured. CONCLUSIONS: Over 20 years, Pennsylvania trauma centers demonstrated improved risk-adjusted mortality rates overall, but improvement remains lacking in high-risk groups despite numerous innovations and practice changes in this time period. Identifying change over time can help guide focus to these critical gaps.

Beyond pain and disability: The lasting effects of trauma on life after injury.

BACKGROUND: The impact of traumatic injury likely extends beyond direct physical consequences and lasts well beyond the acute injury phase. Data collection is sparse after hospital discharge, however. In this observational study, we hypothesized that sequelae of injury would last at least 6 months and sought to prospectively determine patient-reported physical, emotional, and social outcomes during this postinjury period. METHODS: We surveyed patients admitted to our Level I trauma center (July 2019 to October 2020) regarding baseline functioning and quality of life after injury, using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29) instrument, a primary care posttraumatic stress disorder screen, and questions on substance use, employment, and living situation. Patients were re-surveyed at 6 months. PROMIS-29 scores are reported as t scores compared with the US population. Differences between groups were analyzed using χ 2 , signed-rank, and t tests, with paired tests used for changes over time. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-two patients completed the baseline, 130 of whom completed 6-month follow-up. Those completing the 6-month survey were similar ages (43.3 ± 17.8 vs. 44.4 ± 19.0, p = 0.57), mechanism (24.7% vs. 28.0% shot or stabbed, p = 0.61), and severities (median Injury Severity Score, 9 vs. 9; p = 0.15) as those who only completed the baseline. There were 55.0% reported being hospitalized for an injury previously. Patients reported decreases in ability to participate in social roles and activities (mean t score 51.4 vs. 55.3; p = 0.011) and increases in anxiety (53.8 vs. 50.5, p = 0.011) and depression (51.0 vs. 48.7, p = 0.025). There were 26.2% that screened positive for posttraumatic stress disorder at 6 months. Employment decreased at 6 months, with 63.9% reporting being "occasionally" employed or unemployed at 6 months versus 44.6% preinjury ( p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The effects of injury extend beyond pain and disability, impacting several realms of life for at least 6 months following trauma. These data support the development of screening and intervention protocols for postinjury patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level IV.

Settling the Score: Injury Severity Score Fails to Capture Nuances in Pediatric Trauma.

OBJECTIVES: Recent work has questioned the accuracy of the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) in the pediatric population. We sought to determine mortality rates in pediatric trauma patients at ISSs considered "severe" in adults and whether mortality would vary substantially between adults and children sustaining injuries with the same AIS. METHODS: Univariate logistic regression was used to generate mortality rates associated with ISS scores, for children (<16 years of age) and adults, using the 2016 National Trauma Data Bank. Mortality rates at an ISS of 15 were calculated in both groups. We similarly calculated ISS scores associated with mortality rates of 10%, 25%, and 50%. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to compare the discriminative ability of ISS to predict mortality after blunt and penetrating injuries in adults and children. Mortality rates associated with 1 or more AIS 3 injuries per body region were defined. RESULTS: There were 855,454 cases, 86,414 (10.1%) of which were children. The ISS associated with 10%, 25%, and 50% mortality were 35, 44, and 53, respectively, in children; they were 27, 38, and 48 in adults. At an ISS of 15, pediatric mortality was 1.0%; in adults, it was 3.1%. A 3.1% mortality rate was not observed in children until an ISS of 25. On receiver operating characteristic analysis, the ISS performed better in children compared with adults (area under the curve, 0.965 vs 0.860 [P < 0.001]). Adults consistently suffered from higher mortality rates than did children with the same number of severe injuries to a body region, and mortality varied widely between specific selected AIS 3 injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Although the ISS predicts mortality well, children have lower mortality than do adults for the same ISS, and therefore, the accepted definition of severe injury is not equivalent between these 2 cohorts. Mortality risk is highly dependent on the specific nature of the injury, with large variability in outcomes despite identical AIS scores.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Trauma and Emergency Surgery.

There is growing interest in, and need for, integrating palliative care (PC) into the care of patients undergoing emergency surgery and those with traumatic injury. Thus, PC consults for these populations will likely grow in the coming years. Understanding the nuances and unique characteristics of these two acutely ill populations will improve the care that PC clinicians can provide. Using a modified Delphi technique, this article offers 10 tips that experts in the field, based on their broad clinical experience, believe PC clinicians should know about the care of trauma and emergency surgery patients.

Pain Interference and Decreased Physical Function After Emergency General Surgery: Measuring Patient-Reported Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: There is increasing emphasis on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) measures in healthcare, but this area remains largely unexplored in emergency general surgery (EGS) conditions. We hypothesized that postoperative patients in our EGS clinic would report detrimental changes in several domains of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: We administered the PROMIS-29, a HRQoL measurement tool, to postoperative patients in our EGS clinic (11/2019-4/2020). Patients responded to measures of 7 domains. Domain scores were converted to t-scores, allowing comparison to average values within the general US population (set to 50 by definition). We report the mean scores within each domain. Higher scores in negatively worded domains (e.g., "Depression") are worse; vice versa for positively worded domains (e.g., "Physical Function"). Changes in scores at subsequent clinic visits were analyzed using the paired t-test. RESULTS: There were 97 patients who completed the PROMIS-29 at the first postoperative visit. Mean (SD) age was 54.1 (16.2) years; 51% were male. There was no difference in our patients from the average US population in the domains of Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities, Anxiety, Fatigue, and Sleep Disturbance. However, EGS patients experienced significantly greater Pain Interference (56.1 [54.1, 58.1]) and worse Physical Function (40.6 [38.4, 42.7]) than average. For patients seen in follow-up twice (13 patients, median interval between clinic visits 21 days), there were improvements in the domains of Physical Function (42.9 vs 37.3; p = 0.04) and Fatigue. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate room for improvement in the domains of pain interference and physical function. While positive changes over a relatively short period of time are encouraging, consideration should be given to patient perceptions of illness and lifestyle impact when managing EGS patients.

Efficient evaluation of center-level emergency surgery performance using a high-yield procedure set: A step towards an EGS registry.

BACKGROUND: Emergency general surgery (EGS) lacks mechanisms to compare performance between institutions. Focusing on higher-risk procedures may efficiently identify outliers. METHODS: EGS patients were identified from the 2016 State Inpatient Databases of Florida, New York, and Kentucky. Risk-adjusted mortality was calculated as an O:E ratio, generating expected mortality from a model including demographic and procedural factors. Outliers were centers whose 90% confidence intervals excluded 1. This was repeated in several subsets, to determine if these yielded outliers similar to the overall dataset. RESULTS: We identified 45,430 EGS patients. Overall, 3 high performing centers and 5 low performing centers were identified. Exclusion of appendectomies and cholecystectomies resulted in a remaining data set of 13,569 patients (29.9% of the overall data set), with 2 high performers and 5 low performers. One low performer in the limited data set was not identified in the overall set. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of 5 procedures, making up less than a third of EGS, identifies most outliers. A streamlined monitoring procedure may facilitate maintenance of an EGS registry.

Differences Between Center-level Outcomes in Emergency and Elective General Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Center-level outcome metrics have long been tracked in elective surgery (ELS). Despite recent interest in measuring emergency general surgery (EGS) quality, centers are often compared based on elective or combined outcomes. Therefore, quality of care for emergency surgery specifically is unknown. METHODS: We extracted data on EGS and ELS patients from the 2016 State Inpatient Databases of Florida, New York, and Kentucky. Centers that performed >100 ELS and EGS operations were included. Risk-adjusted mortality, complication, and failure to rescue (FTR, death after complication) rates were calculated and observed-to-expected ratios were calculated by center for ELS and EGS patients. Centers were determined to be high or low outliers if the 90% CI for the observed: expected ratio excluded 1. We calculated the frequency with which centers demonstrated a different performance status between EGS and ELS. Kendall's tau values were calculated to assess for correlation between EGS and ELS status. RESULTS: A total of 204 centers with 45,500 EGS cases and 49,380 ELS cases met inclusion criteria. Overall mortality, complication, and FTR rates were 1.7%, 8.0%, and 14.5% respectively. There was no significant correlation between mortality performance in EGS and ELS, with 36 centers in a different performance category (high outlier, low outlier, as expected) in EGS than in ELS. The correlation for complication rates was 0.20, with 60 centers in different categories for EGS and ELS. For FTR rates, there was no correlation, with 16 centers changing category. CONCLUSIONS: There was minimal correlation between outcomes for ELS and EGS. High performers in one category were rarely high performers in the other. There may be important differences between the processes of care that are important for EGS and ELS outcomes that may yield meaningful opportunities for quality improvement.

Mortality After Adolescent Firearm Injury: Effect of Trauma Center Designation.

PURPOSE: To determine the incidence and outcomes of firearm injuries in adolescents and the effect of trauma center (TC) designation on their mortality. METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank (2010-2016) was queried for all encounters involving adolescents aged 13-16 years with firearm injuries. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to determine the association of covariates with mortality (α = .05). Propensity score matching was also used to explore the relationship between TC designation and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 9,029 adolescents met inclusion criteria. Patients aged 15 and 16 years compromised 77.8% of the cohort and were more often male (87.9% vs. 80.6%, p < .001), black (63.8% vs. 56.1%, p < .001), injured in the abdomen (25.4% vs. 22.4%, p = .007) or extremities (62.3% vs. 56.7%, p < .001), and incurred severe injuries (54.5% vs. 50.9%, p = .004) versus 13- and 14-year-old patients. Younger patients were more often injured in the head/neck (23.8% vs. 20.5%, p = .001). Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated no difference in mortality between age groups. Poor neurologic presentation, severe injury, abdominal, chest, and head injuries were all associated with an increased odds of death. Odds of mortality were 2.88 times higher at adult TCs compared to pediatric TCs (CI: 1.55-5.36, p = .001). However, using a 1:1 propensity score matching model, no difference in mortality was found between TC types (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Variability exists in outcomes for adolescents after firearm injuries. Understanding and identifying the potential differences between pediatric and adult TCs managing adolescent firearm victims may improve survival in all treatment venues, but these data support patients being treated at the closest available TC.