Characteristics of Firearm Injury by Injury Intent: The Need for Tailored Interventions.

INTRODUCTION: While the U.S. has high quality data on firearm-related deaths, less information is available on those who arrive at trauma centers alive, especially those discharged from the emergency department. This study sought to describe characteristics of patients arriving to trauma centers alive following a firearm injury, postulating that significant differences in firearm injury intent might provide insights into injury prevention strategies. METHODS: This was a multi-center prospective cohort study of patients treated for firearm-related injuries at 128 U.S. trauma centers from 3/2021-2/2022. Data collected included patient-level sociodemographic, injury and clinical characteristics, community characteristics, and context of injury. The outcome of interest was the association between these factors and the intent of firearm injury. Measures of urbanicity, community distress, and strength of state firearm laws were utilized to characterize patient communities. RESULTS: 15,232 patients presented with firearm-related injuries across 128 centers in 41 states. Overall, 9.5% of patients died, and deaths were more common among law enforcement and self-inflicted (SI) firearm injuries (80.9% and 50.5%, respectively). These patients were also more likely to have a history of mental illness. SI firearm injuries were more common in older White men from rural and less distressed communities, whereas firearm assaults were more common in younger, Black men from urban and more distressed communities. Unintentional injuries were more common among younger patients and in states with lower firearm safety grades whereas law enforcement-related injuries occurred most often in unemployed patients with a history of mental illness. CONCLUSIONS: Injury, clinical, sociodemographic, and community characteristics among patients injured by a firearm significantly differed between intents. With the goal of reducing firearm-related deaths, strategies and interventions need to be tailored to include community improvement and services that address specific patient risk factors for firearm injury intent. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Prognostic/Epidemiological.

Early Versus Late Feeding After Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Placement in Trauma and Burn.

INTRODUCTION: Timing to resume feeds after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement continues to vary among US trauma surgeons. The purpose of this study was to assess differences in meeting nutritional therapy goals and adverse outcomes with early versus late enteral feeding after PEG placement. METHODS: This retrospective review included 364 trauma and burn patients who underwent PEG placement. Data included patient characteristics, time to initiate feeds, rate feeds were resumed, % feed volume goals on postoperative days 0-7, and complications. Statistical analysis was performed comparing two groups (feeds ≤ 6 h versus > 6 h) and three subgroups (< 4 h, 4-6 h, ≥ 6 h) based on data quartiles. Chi-square/Fisher's exact test, independent-samples t-test, and one-way analysis of variance were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Mean time to initiate feeds after PEG was 5.48 ± 4.79 h. Burn patients received early feeds in a larger proportion. A larger proportion of trauma patients received late feeds. The mean % of goal feed volume met on postoperative day 0 was higher in the early feeding group versus the late (P < 0.001). There were no differences in adverse events, even after subgroup analysis of those who received feeds < 4 h after PEG placement. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with early initiation of feeds after PEG placement achieve a higher percentage of goals on day 0 without an increased rate of adverse events. Unfortunately, patients routinely fall short of their target tube feeding goals.

Disaster planning for a surgical surge: when mass trauma threatens to overwhelm your operating rooms.

Mass casualty events particularly those requiring multiple simultaneous operating rooms are of increasing concern. Existing literature predominantly focuses on mass casualty care in the emergency department. Hospital disaster plans should include a component focused on preparing for multiple simultaneous operations. When developing this plan, representatives from all segments of the perioperative team should be included. The plan needs to address activation, communication, physical space, staffing, equipment, blood and medications, disposition offloading, special populations, and rehearsal.

Firearm Injuries treated at Trauma Centers in the United States.

BACKGROUND: While firearm injuries and deaths continue to be a major public health problem, the number of non-fatal firearm injuries and the characteristics of patients is not well known. The American College of Surgeons (ACS) Committee on Trauma leveraged an existing data system to collect additional data on fatal and non-fatal firearm injuries presenting to trauma centers. This report provides an overview of this initiative and highlights the challenges associated with capturing actionable data on firearm-injured patients. METHODS: 128 trauma centers that are part of the ACS Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) collected data on individuals of any age arriving alive between March 1, 2021 and February 28, 2022 with a firearm injury. In addition to the standard data collected for TQIP, abstractors also extracted additional data specific to this study. We linked data from the Distressed Community Index (DCI) to patient records using zip code of residence. RESULTS: A total of 17,395 patients were included, with mean (SD) age of 30.2 (13.5) years, 82.5% were male and the majority were Black and non-Hispanic. The mean proportion of variables with missing data varied among trauma centers, with a mean of 20.7% missing data. Injuries occurred most commonly in homes (31.2%) or on the street (26.6%); 70.4% of injuries were due to assaults. Nearly one-third of patients were discharged from the ED, 25.9% were admitted directly to the operating room, 10.9% to the ICU; 5.9% died in the ED and 10.3% died overall during their course of care. Nearly two-thirds of patients lived in the two highest distressed categories of communities; only 7.5% lived in the least distressed quintile. CONCLUSIONS: Utilizing trauma center data can be a valuable tool to improve our knowledge of firearm injuries if clinical practices and documentation of patient risks and circumstances are standardized. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III Level, epidemiological.

Are trauma surgeons prepared? A survey of trauma surgeons' disaster preparedness before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: US trauma centers (TCs) must remain prepared for mass casualty incidents (MCIs). However, trauma surgeons may lack formal MCI training. The recent COVID-19 pandemic drove multiple patient surges, overloaded Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies, and stressed TCs. This survey assessed trauma surgeons' MCI training, experience, and system and personal preparedness before the pandemic compared with the pandemic's third year. Methods: Survey invitations were emailed to all 1544 members of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma in 2019, and then resent in 2022 to 1575 members with additional questions regarding the pandemic. Questions assessed practice type, TC characteristics, training, experience, beliefs about personal and hospital preparedness, likelihood of MCI scenarios, interventions desired from membership organizations, and pandemic experiences. Results: The response rate was 16.7% in 2019 and 12% in 2022. In 2022, surgeons felt better prepared than their hospitals for pandemic care, mass shootings, and active shooters, but remained feeling less well prepared for cyberattack and hazardous material events, compared with 2019. Only 35% of the respondents had unintentional MCI response experience in 2019 or 2022, and even fewer had experience with intentional MCI. 78% had completed a Stop the Bleed (STB) course and 63% own an STB kit. 57% had engaged in family preparedness activities; less than 40% had a family action plan if they could not come home during an MCI. 100% of the respondents witnessed pandemic-related adverse events, including colleague and coworker illness, patient surges, and resource limitations, and 17% faced colleague or coworker death. Conclusions: Trauma surgeons thought that they became better at pandemic care and rated themselves as better prepared than their hospitals for MCI care, which is an opportunity for them to take greater leadership roles. Opportunities remain to improve surgeons' family and personal MCI preparedness. Surgeons' most desired professional organization interventions include advocacy, national standards for TC preparedness, and online training. Level of evidence: VII, survey of expert opinion.

Shot through the heart: A 17-year analysis of pre-hospital and hospital deaths from penetrating cardiac injuries.

BACKGROUND: Penetrating cardiac injuries (PCI) are often fatal despite rapid transport and treatment in the prehospital setting. Although many studies have identified risk factors for mortality, few studies have included non-transported field mortalities. This study analyzes penetrating cardiac injuries including hospital and coroner reports in the current era. METHODS: Seventeen years of data were reviewed, including the trauma center (TC) registry, medical records, and coroner reports from 2000-2016. PCI were graded using American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) cardiac organ injury score (COIS). Subjects were divided into three groups: field deaths, hospital deaths, and survivors to hospital discharge. The primary outcome is survival to hospital discharge overall and among those transported to the hospital. RESULTS: During the study period, 643 PCI patients were identified, with 52 excluded for inadequate data, leaving 591 for analysis. Mean age was 38.1 ± 17.5 years, and survivors (n=66) were significantly younger than field deaths (n=359) (32.6 ± 14.4 vs 41.1 ± 18.5, p<0.001). Stab wounds had higher survival than gunshot wounds (26.6% vs. 4.3%, p<0.001). COIS grades 4 to 6 (n=602) had lower survival than grades 1 to 3 (n=41) (8.3% vs. 39.0%, p<0.001). Survivors (n=66) had lower median COIS than patients who died in hospital (n=218) (4 vs. 5, p<0.001). Single chamber PCI had higher survival than multiple chamber PCI (13% vs. 5%, p=0.004).  The left ventricle is the most injured (n=177), and right ventricle PCI has the highest survival (p<0.001).  Of field deaths, left ventricular injuries had the highest single chamber mortality (60%), equaling multi-chamber PCI (60%). CONCLUSIONS: Survival to both TC evaluation and hospital discharge following PCI is influenced by many factors including age, mechanism, anatomic site, and grade. Despite advances in trauma care, survival has not appreciably improved.

The Role of the US Trauma Centers in Older Adult Fall Prevention: A National Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 27.5% of adults 65 and older fall each year, over 3 million are treated in an emergency department, and 32 000 die. The American College of Surgeons and its Committee on Trauma (ACSCOT) have urged trauma centers (TCs) to screen for fall risk, but information on the role of TC in this opportunity for prevention is largely unknown. METHODS: A 29-item survey was developed by an ACSCOT Injury Prevention and Control Committee, Older Adult Falls workgroup, and emailed to 1000 trauma directors of the National Trauma Data Bank using Qualtrics. US TCs were surveyed regarding fall prevention, screening, intervention, and hospital discharge practices. Data collected and analyzed included respondent's role, location, population density, state designation or American College of Surgeons (ACS) level, if teaching facility, and patient population. RESULTS: Of the 266 (27%) respondents, 71% of TCs include fall prevention as part of their mission, but only 16% of TCs use fall risk screening tools. There was no significant difference between geographic location or ACS level. The number of prevention resources (F = 31.58, P < .0001) followed by the presence of a formal screening tool (F = 21.47, P < .0001) best predicted the presence of a fall prevention program. CONCLUSION: Older adult falls remain a major injury risk and injury prevention opportunity. The majority of TCs surveyed include prevention of older adult falls as part of their mission, but few incorporate the components of a fall prevention program. Development of best practices and requiring TCs to screen and offer interventions may prevent falls.

Mass Shootings in America: Consensus Recommendations for Healthcare Response.

BACKGROUND: In 2021, 702 people died in mass shooting incidents (MSIs) in the US. To define the best healthcare response to MSIs, the Uniformed Services University's National Center for Disaster Medicine and Public Health hosted a consensus conference of emergency medical services (EMS) clinicians, emergency medicine (EM) physicians, and surgeons who provided medical response to six of the nation's largest recent mass shootings. STUDY DESIGN: The study consisted of a 3-round modified Delphi process. A planning committee selected 6 MSI sites with the following criteria: the MSI occurred in 2016 or later, and must have resulted in at least 15 people killed and injured. The MSI sites were Orlando, FL, Las Vegas, NV, Sutherland Springs, TX, Parkland, FL, El Paso, TX, and Dayton, OH. Fifteen clinicians participated in the conference. All participants had EMS, EM, or surgery expertise and responded to 1 of the 6 MSIs. The first round consisted of a 2-part survey. The second and third rounds consisted of site-specific presentations followed by specialty-specific discussion groups to generate consensus recommendations. RESULTS: The 3 specialty-specific groups created 8 consensus recommendations in common. These 8 recommendations addressed readiness training, public education, triage, communication, patient tracking, medical records, family reunification, and mental health services for responders. There were an additional 11 recommendations created in common between 2 subgroups, either EMS and EM (2), EM and surgery (7), or EMS and surgery (2). CONCLUSIONS: There are multiple common recommendations identified by EMS, EM, and surgery clinicians who responded to recent MSIs. Clinicians, emergency planners, and others involved in preparing and executing a response to a future mass shooting event may benefit from considering these consensus lessons learned.

A Pediatric Cervical Spine Clearance Guideline Leads to Fewer Unnecessary Computed Tomography Scans and Decreased Radiation Exposure.

OBJECTIVES: Physical examination and computed tomography (CT) are useful to rule out cervical spine injury (CSI). Computed tomography scans increase lifetime cancer risk in children from radiation exposure. Most CSI in children occur between the occiput and C4. We developed a cervical spine (C-spine) clearance guideline to reduce unnecessary CTs and radiation exposure in pediatric trauma patients. METHODS: A pediatric C-spine clearance guideline was implemented in September 2018 at our Level 2 Pediatric Trauma Center. Guidance included CT of C1 to C4 to scan only high-yield regions versus the entire C-spine and decrease radiation dose. A retrospective cohort study was conducted comparing preguideline and postguideline of all pediatric trauma patients younger than 8 years screened for CSI from July 2017 to December 2020. Primary endpoints included the following: number of full C-spine and C1 to C4 CT scans and radiation dose. Secondary endpoints were CSI rate and missed CSI. Results were compared using χ 2 and Wilcoxon rank-sum test with P < 0.05 significant. RESULTS: The review identified 726 patients: 273 preguideline and 453 postguideline. A similar rate of total C-spine CTs were done in both groups (23.1% vs 23.4%, P = 0.92). Full C-spine CTs were more common preguideline (22.7% vs 11.9%, P < 0.001), whereas C1 to C4 CT scans were more common post-guideline (11.5% vs 0.4%, P < 0.001). Magnetic resonance imaging utilization and CSIs identified were similar in both groups. The average radiation dose was lower postguideline (114 vs 265 mGy·cm -1 ; P < 0.001). There were no missed CSI. CONCLUSIONS: A pediatric C-spine clearance guideline led to increasing CT of C1 to C4 over full C-spine imaging, reducing the radiation dose in children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic.

Pediatric Burn Care: How Burn Camps Survived and Thrived During the Coronavirus Pandemic.

Burn camps play a vital role in the recovery of burn survivors by allowing them to develop the confidence and skill sets needed to reintegrate back into society. During the COVID-19 pandemic, burn camps across the United States and Canada could not hold any in-person activities. They had to either pause burn camps or quickly adapt to a virtual online platform. A 37-item electronic survey was developed and emailed to burn camp directors in the United States and Canada to determine what adaptations were necessary during the pandemic. This survey allowed directors to provide details on many facets such as camp format, successes observed, and challenges encountered. Twenty-one of 34 (62%) burn camp organizations completed the survey. Thirteen of the 21 (62%) respondents held virtual burn camps in 2020 while everyone else canceled their camps in 2020. The mean number of camps offered per organization decreased from 6.3 in 2019 to 4.7 in 2020. The average number of burn survivors and family members participating also dropped in that same period (2019 aggregate mean = 229.2 vs 2020 aggregate mean = 151.4). Components of virtual camp included video conferencing platforms, "camp-in-a-box" activities, and some prerecorded sessions. Most camp directors believed that their campers were satisfied with the virtual format. Factors allowing for a successful virtual camp included an effective online platform, scheduling adequate duration of programs, and appropriate staffing levels. Most common barriers to an effective virtual camp were participant engagement, special needs/accessibility concerns, and staff effectiveness in this format. While challenging, burn camps can be held in a virtual format successfully with proper planning, staff training, and support of campers and their families.

Higher risk of auto versus pedestrian crashes in school-age children on school days.

BACKGROUND: This study examines the rates of pediatric auto versus pedestrian collision (APCs) and determined ages and periods of greatest risk. We hypothesized that the rate of APC in children would be higher on school days and in the timeframes correlating with travel to and from school. METHODS: Retrospective case-control study of APC on school and nonschool days for patients younger than 18 years at an urban Level II pediatric trauma center from January 2011 to November 2019. Frequency of APC by hour of the day was plotted overall, for school versus nonschool days and for age groups: 0 year to 4 years, 5 years to 9 years, 10 years to 13 years, and 14 years to 17 years. t Test was used with a p value less than 0.05, which was considered significant. RESULTS: There were 441 pediatric APC in the study period. Frequency of all APC was greater on school days (0.174 vs. 0.101; relative risk [RR], 1.72, p < 0.001), and APC with Injury Severity Score greater than 15 (0.039 vs. 0.024; p = 0.014; RR, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-2.56). Comparing school day with nonschool day, the 0-year to 4-year group had no significant difference in APC frequency (0.021 vs. 0.014; p = 0.129), APC frequency was higher on school days in all other age groups: 5 years to 9 years (0.036 vs. 0.019; RR, 1.89; p = 0.0134), 10 years to 13 years (0.055 vs. 0.024; RR, 2.29; p < 0.001), and 14 years to 17 years (0.061 vs. 0.044; RR, 1.39; p = 0.045). The greatest increase in APC on school days was in the 10-year to 13-year age group. DISCUSSION: All school age children are at higher risk of APC on school days. The data support our hypothesis that children are at higher risk of APC during transit to and from school. The age 10-year to 13-year group had a 129% increase in APC frequency on school days. This age group should be a focus of injury prevention efforts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level IV.

The Volume of Thoracic Irrigation Is Associated With Length of Stay in Patients With Traumatic Hemothorax.

INTRODUCTION: Irrigation of the thoracic cavity at tube thoracostomy (TT) placement may decrease the rate of a retained hemothorax (RHTX); however, other resource utilization outcomes have not yet been quantified. This study evaluated the association of thoracic irrigation during TT with the length of stay and outcomes in patients with traumatic hemothorax (HTX). METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of adult patients receiving a TT for HTX at a single, urban Level 1 Trauma Center from January 2019 to December 2020. Those who underwent irrigation during TT at the discretion of the trauma surgeon were compared to a control of standard TT without irrigation. Death within 30 d, as well as TTs, placed at outside hospitals, during traumatic arrest or thoracic procedures, and for isolated pneumothoraces were excluded. The primary outcome was the length of stay as hospital-free, ICU-free, and ventilator-free days (30-day benchmark). Subgroup analysis by irrigation volume was conducted using one-way ANOVA testing with P < 0.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Eighty-two (41.4%) of 198 patients underwent irrigation during TT placement. Secondary interventions, thoracic infections, and TT duration were not statistically different in the irrigated cohort. Hospital-free and ICU-free days were higher in the irrigated patients than in the controls. Groups irrigated with ≥1000 mL had significant more hospital-free days (P = 0.007) than those receiving less than 1000 mL. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with traumatic HTX who underwent thoracic irrigation at the time of TT placement had decreased hospital and ICU days compared to standard TT placement alone. Specifically, our study demonstrated that patients irrigated with a volume of at least 1000 mL had greater hospital-free days compared to those irrigated with less than 1000 mL.

When Is It Safe to Feed After Surgical Feeding Tube Placement? A Survey of EAST Members.

INTRODUCTION: Many critically ill trauma and surgical patients require nutritional support. Patients needing long-term enteral access often undergo placement of surgical feeding tubes, including percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube, laparoscopic gastrostomy tube, and open gastrostomy tube. This study was performed to determine national practice patterns for feeding after feeding tube placement. METHODS: A 16-question online survey was administered to members of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma via Qualtrics about feeding practices after placement of the feeding tube. Questions included demographics, training, current practice, annual procedural volume, timing to resume feeds: <2, 6, 12, or 24 h, methods to advance feeds, and reasons behind management decisions. For comparison, responses were grouped into "early" (≤6 h) and "late" (18-24 h) groups. The chi-square test was used, and P < 0.05 was significant. RESULTS: Five hundred sixteen Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma members completed the survey. Most (95%) respondents worked at a level 1 or 2 trauma center, and 68% are in academic practice. The most common feeding tube placement was percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (median = 25/y, interquartile range = 15-40). Responses showed variability in timing of when feeds were resumed after procedure. Early feeding was not affected by age (≤42 y), trauma center designation, volume, or training programs at the respondent's hospital. Graduates of surgical critical care fellowship were less likely to feed early (P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: There is wide variability in feeding practices after surgical feeding tube placement. Given the large quantity of procedures performed, a randomized controlled trial should be performed to determine the optimal timing to resume feeds in critically ill patients.

Evaluating Long-Term Outcomes of a High School-Based Impaired and Distracted Driving Prevention Program.

Motor vehicle crashes are one of the leading causes of death among teenagers. Many of these deaths are due to preventable causes, including impaired and distracted driving. You Drink, You Drive, You Lose (YDYDYL) is a prevention program to educate high school students about the consequences of impaired and distracted driving. YDYDYL was conducted at a public high school in Southern Nevada in March 2020. A secondary data analysis was conducted to compare knowledge and attitudes of previous participants with first-time participants. Independent-samples-t test and χ2 test/Fisher's exact test with post-contingency analysis were used to compare pre-event responses between students who had attended the program one year prior and students who had not. Significance was set at p < 0.05. A total of 349 students participated in the survey and were included for analysis; 177 had attended the program previously (50.7%) and 172 had not (49.3%). The mean age of previous participants and first-time participants was 16.2 (SD ± 1.06 years) and 14.9 (SD ± 0.92 years), respectively. Statistically significant differences in several self-reported baseline behaviors and attitudinal responses were found between the two groups; for example, 47.4% of previous participants compared to 29.4% of first-time participants disagreed that reading text messages only at a stop light was acceptable. Students were also asked how likely they were to intervene if a friend or family member was practicing unsafe driving behaviors; responses were similar between the two groups. The baseline behaviors and attitudes of participants regarding impaired and distracted driving were more protective among previous participants compared to first-time participants, suggesting the program results in long-term positive changes in behaviors and attitudes. The results of this secondary retrospective study may be useful for informing the implementation of future impaired and distracted driving prevention programs.

Skilled maneuvering: Evaluation of a young driver advanced training program.

BACKGROUND: Young drivers (YDs) are disproportionately injured and killed in motor vehicle crashes throughout the United States. Nationally, YDs aged 16 to 20 years constituted nearly 9% of all traffic-related fatalities in 2018. A Nevada Advanced Driver Training (ADT) program for YDs aims to reduce YD traffic injuries and fatalities through four modules taught by professional drivers. The program modules include classroom-based didactic lessons and hands-on driving exercises intended to improve safe driving knowledge and behaviors. The overarching purpose of this study was to determine if the Nevada ADT program achieved its objectives for improving safe driving knowledge and behaviors based on program-provided data. A secondary purpose of this study was to provide recommendations to improve program efficiency, delivery, and evaluation. The findings of this study would serve as a basis to develop and evaluate future ADT interventions. METHODS: The exploratory mixed methods outcome evaluation used secondary data collected during three weekend events in December 2018 and March 2019. The study population consisted of high school students with a driver's license or learner's permit. Pretests/posttests and preevent questionnaires on student driving history were matched and linked via personal identifiers. The pretests/posttests measured changes in knowledge of safe driving behaviors. This study used descriptive statistics, dependent samples t test, Pearson's r correlation coefficient, and χ2 (McNemar's test) with significance set at p = 0.05, 95% confidence interval. Statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS version 24 (Armonk, NY). Qualitative data analysis consisted of content and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Responses from YD participants (N = 649) were provided for analysis. Aggregate YD participant knowledge of safe driving behaviors increased from a mean of 43.9% (pretest) to 74.9% (posttest). CONCLUSION: The program achieved its intended outcomes of improving safe driving knowledge and behaviors among its target population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/Epidemiologic, Level V.

Pediatric Trauma Arrival Times and the Swing Shift.

BACKGROUND: Trauma center staff and trainees are often assigned to a day and night shift. However, for adult trauma, the swing shift has been found to offer superior clinical exposure compared with a standard day or night shift for trainees. We characterized patterns in pediatric trauma arrival times based on the hour, weekday, and month and studied whether or not the swing shift also maximizes exposure to hands-on experiences in managing pediatric trauma. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the trauma database at our urban, level 2 pediatric trauma center. We identified all the pediatric trauma activations in the last 13 years (2006-2018). A retrospective shift log was created, which included day (7:00 am to 7:00 pm), night (7:00 pm to 7:00 am), and swing (noon to midnight) shifts. The shifts were compared using the Wilcoxon match-pairs signed rank test. Weekends data were also compared with weekdays, and comparisons were also made for pediatric patients with Injury Severity Scores (ISS) >15. RESULTS: There were 3532 pediatric patients identified for our study. The swing shift had 1.98 times more activations than the night shift, and 1.33 more than the day shift (P < 0.001). The swing shift was also superior to both the day and night shifts for exposure to patients with Injury Severity Score greater than 15 (P < 0.001). Weekend days had 1.28 times more trauma than the weekdays (P < 0.001). Peak arrival time was between the hours of 3:00 pm and 9:00 pm, and patient age did not have an effect on this trend. CONCLUSIONS: Experience in managing pediatric trauma patients will improve for trainees who utilize the swing shift. In addition, the hours between 3:00 pm and 9:00 pm on weekends may represent a time of particularly high likelihood of pediatric trauma arrivals, which may require extra staff and hospital resources.Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Study, Level IV.

Consensus-based Standards and Indicators to strengthen trauma center injury and violence prevention programs.

For decades, the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACSCOT) has published Resources for Optimal Care of the Injured Patient, which outlines specific criteria necessary to be verified by the college as a trauma center, including having an organized and effective approach to prevention of trauma. However, the document provides little public health-specific guidance to assist trauma centers with developing these approaches. An advisory panel was convened in 2017 with representatives from national trauma and public health organizations with the purpose of identifying strategies to support trauma centers in the development of a public health approach to injury and violence prevention and to better integrate these efforts with those of local and state public health departments. This panel developed the Standards and Indicators for Model Level I and II Trauma Center Injury and Violence Prevention Programs. The document outlines five, consensus-based core components of a model injury and violence prevention program: (1) leadership, (2) resources, (3) data, (4) effective interventions, and (5) partnerships. We think this document provides the missing public health guidance and is an essential resource to trauma centers for effectively addressing injury and violence in our communities. We recommend the Standards and Indicators be referenced in the injury prevention chapter of the upcoming revision of ACSCOT's Resources for Optimal Care of the Injured Patient as guidance for the development, implementation and evaluation of injury prevention programs and be used as a framework for program presentation during ACSCOT verification visits.

Survey of American College of Surgeons Members on Firearm Injury Prevention.

BACKGROUND: Firearm-related injuries and deaths continue to be a substantial public health burden in the US. The purpose of this study was to describe the results of a survey of US members of the American College of Surgeons (ACS) on their practices, attitudes, and beliefs about firearms and firearm policies. The survey was designed to gain a representative understanding of the views of all US ACS members to help inform ACS positions related to firearm injury prevention. STUDY DESIGN: A professional survey firm was engaged to facilitate the design of the survey and to support a web-based platform. Data collection through an anonymous survey began in July 2018, with the survey closing in September 2018. Survey data were weighted and analyses included descriptive and bivariate statistics. RESULTS: There were 54,761 ACS members invited to participate in the survey. Of those, 11,147 respondents completed the survey, for an overall response rate of 20.4%. Respondents were questioned on firearm experience, purpose of firearm ownership, opinions on firearm ownership, and importance of ACS support for specific firearm legislation. Survey results varied by practice and training location, practice type, military experience, gender, age, presence of children in the home, level of training, and race and ethnicity. Most survey respondents were ACS fellows (n = 7,579 [68%]), male (n = 8,671 [77.8%]), and White (n = 8,639 [77.5%]). Forty-two percent of respondents keep guns in their home. Seventy-five percent of respondents believe that it is very or extremely important for the ACS to support policy initiatives to lower the incidence of firearm injury. CONCLUSIONS: There is broad support among ACS members for many initiatives related to firearm injury prevention. The degree of support for these measures varies based on both the specific initiative and demographic characteristics. The results align with the ACS strategy of healthcare professionals working together to better understand and address the root causes of violence, and simultaneously working together to make firearm ownership as safe as reasonably possible.

Firearm Storage Practices of US Members of the American College of Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: As a part of its firearm injury prevention action plan, the American College of Surgeons (ACS) surveyed the entire US ACS membership regarding individual members' knowledge, experience, attitudes, degree of support for ACS Committee on Trauma (COT) firearm programs, and degree of support for a range of firearm injury prevention policies. This survey included questions regarding members' prevalence of firearm ownership, type of firearm(s) owned, type of firearm(s) in the home, personal reasons for firearm ownership, and methods of firearm/ammunition storage. STUDY DESIGN: An email invitation to participate in an anonymous, 23-item survey on firearms was sent to all US ACS members (n = 54,761) by a contracted survey research firm. Cross tabulation of questionnaire items by demographic characteristics and chi-square analyses were performed with statistical significance p < 0.05. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 20.4% (11,147/54,761). Forty-two percent of respondents keep firearms in their home (82% long guns, 82% handguns; 32% high-capacity magazine fed, semi-automatic rifles); 75% keep guns for self-defense/protection, 73% for target shooting; 39% store firearms unlocked, and 32% store guns unlocked and loaded. Results vary by practice/training location, practice type, military experience, sex, age, presence of children in the home, level of training, and race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: A significant percentage of ACS members keep firearms in their home, and nearly one-third store firearms in an unlocked and loaded fashion. Safe storage is a basic tenet of responsible firearm ownership. These data present opportunities for engaging surgeons in efforts to improve safe firearm storage.

American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Prevention Committee review: Family Justice Centers-a not-so-novel, but unknown gem.

The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma requires that trauma centers demonstrate adequate financial support for an injury prevention program as part of the verification process. With the ongoing challenges that arise with important social determinants of health, trauma centers have the important task of navigating a patient through the complex process of obtaining services and tools for success. This summary from the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Prevention Committee focuses on a model that has been present for several years, but has not been brought to full awareness in the trauma world. It highlights the importance of the Family Justice Center concept that brings a multitude of organizations under one roof, thus eliminating the hurdles encompassed by trauma patients, seeking life-changing resources necessary to mitigate the impact of both community violence exposure and intimate partner/domestic violence. It discusses the potential benefits of a partnership between trauma centers and Family Justice Centers and similar models. Finally, it also raises awareness of important programmatic evaluation research required in the arena of injury prevention targeting a population whose outcomes are difficult to measure.