Research priorities for the management of major trauma: an international priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to determine research priorities for the management of major trauma, representing the shared priorities of patients, their families, carers and healthcare professionals. DESIGN/SETTING: An international research priority-setting partnership. PARTICIPANTS: People who have experienced major trauma, their carers and relatives, and healthcare professionals involved in treating patients after major trauma. The scope included chest, abdominal and pelvic injuries as well as major bleeding, multiple injuries and those that threaten life or limb. METHODS: A multiphase priority-setting exercise was conducted in partnership with the James Lind Alliance over 24 months (November 2021-October 2023). An international survey asked respondents to submit their research uncertainties which were then combined into several indicative questions. The existing evidence was searched to ensure that the questions had not already been sufficiently answered. A second international survey asked respondents to prioritise the research questions. A final shortlist of 19 questions was taken to a stakeholder workshop, where consensus was reached on the top 10 priorities. RESULTS: A total of 1572 uncertainties, submitted by 417 respondents (including 132 patients and carers), were received during the initial survey. These were refined into 53 unique indicative questions, of which all 53 were judged to be true uncertainties after reviewing the existing evidence. 373 people (including 115 patients and carers) responded to the interim prioritisation survey and 19 questions were taken to a final consensus workshop between patients, carers and healthcare professionals. At the final workshop, a consensus was reached for the ranking of the top 10 questions. CONCLUSIONS: The top 10 research priorities for major trauma include patient-centred questions regarding pain relief and prehospital management, multidisciplinary working, novel technologies, rehabilitation and holistic support. These shared priorities will now be used to guide funders and teams wishing to research major trauma around the globe.

Trauma systems in high socioeconomic index countries in 2050.

Considerable political, structural, environmental and epidemiological change will affect high socioeconomic index (SDI) countries over the next 25 years. These changes will impact healthcare provision and consequently trauma systems. This review attempts to anticipate the potential impact on trauma systems and how they could adapt to meet the changing priorities. The first section describes possible epidemiological trajectories. A second section exposes existing governance and funding challenges, how these can be met, and the need to incorporate data and information science into a learning and adaptive trauma system. The last section suggests an international harmonization of trauma education to improve care standards, optimize immediate and long-term patient needs and enhance disaster preparedness and crisis resilience. By demonstrating their capacity for adaptation, trauma systems can play a leading role in the transformation of care systems to tackle future health challenges.

Emergency nurses' preference for tools to identify frailty in major trauma patients: A prospective multi-centre cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is known to be a predictor of poor recovery following trauma and there is evidence that providing early frailty specific care can improve functional and health outcomes. Accurate assessment of frailty is key to its early identification and subsequent provision of specialist care. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility and acceptability of different frailty screening tools to nurses administering them in the ED in patients admitted following traumatic injury. METHODS: Patients aged 65 and over attending the Emergency Department of five major trauma centres following injury participated in the study between June 2019 and March 2020. Patients were assessed using the clinical frailty scale (CFS), Program of Research to Integrate Services for the Maintenance of Autonomy 7 (PRIMSA7), and the Trauma Specific Frailty Index (TSFI). Nurses were asked to rank ease of use and to state their preference for each of the tools from best to worst. If the tool was not able to be completed fully then free text responses were enabled to identify reasons. Accuracy of the tool in identifying if the patient was frail or not was determined by comparison with frailty determined by a geriatrician. RESULTS: Data were analysed from 372 patients. Completion rates for each of the tools varied, with highest degree of compliance using the CFS (98.9%). TSFI was least likely to be completed with "lack of available information to complete questions" as the most cited reason. Nurses showed a clear preference for the CFS with 57.3% ranking this as first choice (PRISMA-7 32.16%; TSFI 10.54%). Both PRISMA-7 and CFS were both rated highly as 'extremely easy to complete' (PRISMA-7 58.5%, CFS 59.61%). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that nurses from five centres preferred to use the CFS to assess frailty in ED major trauma patients.

Investigating the effects of frailty on six-month outcomes in older trauma patients admitted to UK major trauma centres: a multi-centre follow up study.

BACKGROUND: Pre-injury frailty is associated with adverse in-hospital outcomes in older trauma patients, but the association with longer term survival and recovery is unclear. We aimed to investigate post discharge survival and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in older frail patients at six months after Major Trauma Centre (MTC) admission. METHODS: This was a multi-centre study of patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted to five MTCs. Data were collected via questionnaire at hospital discharge and six months later. The primary outcome was patient-reported HRQoL at follow up using Euroqol EQ5D-5 L visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes included health status according to EQ5D dimensions and care requirements at follow up. Multivariable linear regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the association between predictor variables and EQ-5D-5 L VAS at follow up. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients died in the follow up period, of which two-third (64%) had been categorised as frail pre-injury, compared to 21 (16%) of the 133 survivors. There was no difference in self-reported HRQoL between frail and not-frail patients at discharge (Mean EQ-VAS: Frail 55.8 vs. Not-frail 64.1, p = 0.137) however at follow-up HRQoL had improved for the not-frail group but deteriorated for frail patients (Mean EQ-VAS: Frail: 50.0 vs. Not-frail: 65.8, p = 0.009). There was a two-fold increase in poor quality of life at six months (VAS ≤ 50) for frail patients (Frail: 65% vs. Not-frail: 30% p < 0.009). Frailty (ß-13.741 [95% CI -25.377, 2.105], p = 0.02), increased age (ß -1.064 [95% CI [-1.705, -0.423] p = 0.00) and non-home discharge (ß -12.017 [95% CI [118.403, 207.203], p = 0.04) were associated with worse HRQoL at follow up. Requirements for professional carers increased five-fold in frail patients at follow-up (Frail: 25% vs. Not-frail: 4%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is associated with increased mortality post trauma discharge and frail older trauma survivors had worse HRQoL and increased care needs at six months post-discharge. Pre-injury frailty is a predictor of poor longer-term HRQoL after trauma and recognition should enable early specialist pathways and discharge planning.

Prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) for treatment of trauma-induced coagulopathy: systematic review and meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC) is common in trauma patients with major hemorrhage. Prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) is used as a potential treatment for the correction of TIC, but the efficacy, timing, and evidence to support its use in injured patients with hemorrhage are unclear. METHODS: A systematic search of published studies was performed on MEDLINE and EMBASE databases using standardized search equations. Ongoing studies were identified using clinicaltrials.gov. Studies investigating the use of PCC to treat TIC (on its own or in combination with other treatments) in adult major trauma patients were included. Studies involving pediatric patients, studies of only traumatic brain injury (TBI), and studies involving only anticoagulated patients were excluded. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Pooled effects of PCC use were reported using random-effects model meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed for each study, and we used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation to assess the quality of evidence. RESULTS: After removing duplicates, 1745 reports were screened and nine observational studies and one randomized controlled trial (RCT) were included, with a total of 1150 patients receiving PCC. Most studies used 4-factor-PCC with a dose of 20-30U/Kg. Among observational studies, co-interventions included whole blood (n = 1), fibrinogen concentrate (n = 2), or fresh frozen plasma (n = 4). Outcomes were inconsistently reported across studies with wide variation in both measurements and time points. The eight observational studies included reported mortality with a pooled odds ratio of 0.97 [95% CI 0.56-1.69], and five reported deep venous thrombosis (DVT) with a pooled OR of 0.83 [95% CI 0.44-1.57]. When pooling the observational studies and the RCT, the OR for mortality and DVT was 0.94 [95% CI 0.60-1.45] and 1.00 [95% CI 0.64-1.55] respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among published studies of TIC, PCCs did not significantly reduce mortality, nor did they increase the risk of VTE. However, the potential thrombotic risk remains a concern that should be addressed in future studies. Several RCTs are currently ongoing to further explore the efficacy and safety of PCC.

Factors Associated With Delayed Pre-Hospital Times During Trauma-Related Mass Casualty Incidents: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Critically injured patients have experienced delays in being transported to hospitals during Mass Casualty Incidents (MCIs). Extended pre-hospital times (PHTs) are associated with increased mortality. It is not clear which factors affect overall PHT during an MCI. This systematic review aimed to investigate PHTs in trauma-related MCIs and identify factors associated with delays for triaged patients at incident scenes. METHODS: This systematic review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Web of Science, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched between January and February 2022 for evidence. Research studies of any methodology, and grey literature in English, were eligible for inclusion. Studies were narratively synthesized according to Cochrane guidance. RESULTS: Of the 2025 publications identified from the initial search, 12 papers met the inclusion criteria. 6 observational cohort studies and 6 case reports described a diverse range of MCIs. PHTs were reported variably across incidents, from a median of 35 minutes to 8 hours, 8 minutes. Factors associated with prolonged PHT included: challenging incident locations, concerns about scene safety, and adverse decision-making in MCI triage responses. Casualty numbers did not consistently influence PHTs. Study quality was rated moderate to high. CONCLUSION: PHT delays of more than 2 hours were common. Future MCI planning should consider responses within challenging environments and enhanced timely triage decision-making.

Heterogeneity in defining multiple trauma: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: While numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted in the field of trauma, a substantial portion of them are yielding negative results. One potential contributing factor to this trend could be the lack of agreement regarding the chosen definitions across different trials. The primary objective was to identify the terminology and definitions utilized for the characterization of multiple trauma patients within randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE and clinicaltrials.gov between January 1, 2002, and July 31, 2022. RCTs or RTCs protocols were eligible if they included multiple trauma patients. The terms employed to characterize patient populations were identified, and the corresponding definitions for these terms were extracted. The subsequent impact on the population recruited was then documented to expose clinical heterogeneity. RESULTS: Fifty RCTs were included, and 12 different terms identified. Among these terms, the most frequently used were "multiple trauma" (n = 21, 42%), "severe trauma" (n = 8, 16%), "major trauma" (n = 4, 8%), and trauma with hemorrhagic shock" (n = 4, 8%). Only 62% of RCTs (n = 31) provided a definition for the terms used, resulting a total of 21 different definitions. These definitions primarily relied on the injury severity score (ISS) (n = 15, 30%), displaying an important underlying heterogeneity. The choice of the terms had an impact on the study population, affecting both the ISS and in-hospital mortality. Eleven protocols were included, featuring five different terms, with "severe trauma" being the most frequent, occurring six times (55%). CONCLUSION: This systematic review uncovers an important heterogeneity both in the terms and in the definitions employed to recruit trauma patients within RCTs. These findings underscore the imperative of promoting the use of a unique and consistent definition.

Nationwide analysis of prehospital tranexamic acid for trauma demonstrates systematic bias in adherence to treatment guidelines: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital (PH) tranexamic acid (TXA) improves survival from trauma haemorrhage. Injury mechanism, physiology, and sex demographics vary with patient age. The authors hypothesised that these factors influence TXA guideline compliance and examined national trends in PH use to identify any systematic biases in bleeding management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The UK Trauma Audit and Research Network data for TXA eligible patients admitted to major trauma centres were divided into two cohorts: 2013-2015 ( n =32 072) and 2017-2019 ( n =14 974). Patients were stratified by PH, emergency department or no TXA use. Logistic regression models explored interaction between PH variables and TXA administration. Results are presented as odds ratios with a 95% CI. RESULTS: PH TXA use increased from 8% to 27% over time ( P <0.001). Only 3% of eligible patients who fell less than 2 m received PH TXA versus 63% with penetrating injuries ( P <0.001). Older patients eligible for PH TXA were less likely to receive it compared to younger patients [≥65 years old: 590 (13%) vs. <65 years old: 3361 (33%), P <0.001]. There was a significant interaction between age and sex with fewer older women receiving PH TXA. In shocked patients, one third of females compared to a fifth of men did not receive TXA ( P <0.001). There was a decrease in PH TXA use as age increased ( P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a threefold increase in use, treatment guidance for PH TXA is not universally applied. Older people, women, and patients with low energy injury mechanisms appear to be systematically under treated. Training and education for PH providers should address these potential treatment biases.

Scoping review of the literature to ascertain how the STUMBL Score clinical prediction model is used to manage patients with blunt chest wall trauma in emergency care.

INTRODUCTION: The STUMBL Score clinical prediction model was originally developed and externally validated to support clinical decision-making of patients with blunt chest wall trauma in the Emergency Department. The aim of this scoping review was to understand the extent and type of evidence in relation to the STUMBL Score clinical prediction model as a component of the management of patients with blunt chest wall trauma managed in the Emergency Care setting. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted across databases, including Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from Jan 2014 to Feb 2023. In addition, a search of the grey literature was undertaken along with citation searching of relevant studies. Published and non-published sources of all research designs were included. Data extracted included specific details about the participants, concept, context, study methods and key findings relevant to the review question. Data extraction followed the JBI guidance and results presented in tabular format accompanied with a narrative summary. RESULTS: A total of 44 sources originating from eight countries were identified, 28 were published and 16 grey literature. Sources were grouped into four separate categories: 1) external validation studies, 2) guidance documents, 3) practice reviews and educational resources 3) research studies and quality improvement projects, 4) grey literature unpublished resources. This body of evidence describes the clinical utility of the STUMBL Score and has identify how the score is being implemented and used differently in different settings including analgesic selection and participant eligibility for including in chest wall injury research studies. DISCUSSION: This review demonstrates how the STUMBL Score has evolved from solely predicting risk of respiratory complications to a measure which supports clinical decision making for the use of complex analgesic modes and as a guide for eligibility in chest wall injury trauma research studies. Despite external validation of the STUMBL Score, there is a need for further calibration and evaluation, particularly relating to these repurposed functions of the score. Overall, the clinical benefit of the score remains clear and its wide usage demonstrates the impact it has on clinical care, patient experience and clinician decision making.

Establishing the research priorities for major trauma in the United Kingdom: A Delphi study of nurses and allied health professionals.

BACKGROUND: Research prioritisation exercises are used to determine which areas of research are important. In major trauma care, nurses and allied health professionals are central to the delivery of evidence-based care but their opinions on research priorities are under-represented in the literature. We aimed to identify the research priorities of major trauma nurses and allied health professionals in the UK. METHODS: A three-round electronic Delphi study was conducted in the UK between November 2019 and May 2021. Round one aimed to generate research questions with rounds two and three questions in order of priority. In stages two and three responses were analysed using descriptive statistics to compute frequencies and proportions for the ranking of each question. RESULTS: Survey rounds were completed by 180, 100 and 91 respondents respectively. The first round generated 285 statements that were condensed into 71 research questions. Analysis of rankings in subsequent rounds prioritised 54 research questions across themes of adult / children's acute care, psychological care and workforce, training and education. DISCUSSION: Nurses and AHPs are well-positioned to determine research priorities in major trauma care. Focusing on these priorities will guide future research and help to build an evidence-base in trauma care.

Major trauma among E-Scooter and bicycle users: a nationwide cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence, demographics and injury patterns involved in E-Scooter-related hospital admissions due to significant trauma compared with bicycle-related trauma within England and Wales. To compare morbidity and mortality between groups. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study based on data which has been prospectively collected and submitted to the UK Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) registry. SETTING: Major trauma centres and trauma units within England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Patients of any age who were admitted to hospitals in England and Wales with injuries following E-Scooter or bicycle incidents between the dates 1 January 2021-31 December 2021. All patients must have met TARN database inclusion criteria. OUTCOMES: In-hospital mortality, critical care admission and length of stay (LoS), hospital LoS and discharge destination. RESULTS: There were 293 E-Scooter trauma incidents compared with 2538 bicycle incidents. E-Scooter users were more likely to be admitted to a major trauma centre (p=0.019) or a critical care unit (p<0.001). Serious head and limb trauma (Abbreviated Injury Scale >2) occurred more frequently among the E-Scooter cohort (35.2% vs 19.7%, p<0.001 and 39.9% vs 27.2%, p<0.001, respectively) while serious chest and pelvic trauma were greater among bicycle users (p<0.001 and p=0.003, respectively). Over one-third of E-Scooter injuries were incurred outside the current legislation by patients who were intoxicated by alcohol and drugs (26%, 75/293) or under the age of 17 (14%, 41/293). CONCLUSIONS: These early results suggest a greater relative incidence of serious trauma and an alternative pattern of injury among E-Scooter users compared with bicycles. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: TARN210101.

Configurations and outcomes of acute hospital care for frail and older patients with moderate to major trauma: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review research on acute hospital care for frail or older adults experiencing moderate to major trauma. SETTING: Electronic databases (Medline, Embase, ASSIA, CINAHL Plus, SCOPUS, PsycINFO, EconLit, The Cochrane Library) were searched using index and key words, and reference lists and related articles hand-searched. INCLUDED ARTICLES: Peer-reviewed articles of any study design, published in English, 1999-2020 inclusive, referring to models of care for frail and/or older people in the acute hospital phase of care following traumatic injury defined as either moderate or major (mean or median Injury Severity Score ≥9). Excluded articles reported no empirical findings, were abstracts or literature reviews, or referred to frailty screening alone. METHODS: Screening abstracts and full text, and completing data extractions and quality assessments using QualSyst was a blinded parallel process. A narrative synthesis, grouped by intervention type, was undertaken. OUTCOME MEASURES: Any outcomes reported for patients, staff or care system. RESULTS: 17 603 references were identified and 518 read in full; 22 were included-frailty and major trauma (n=0), frailty and moderate trauma (n=1), older people and major trauma (n=8), moderate or major trauma (n=7) 0r moderate trauma (n=6) . Studies were observational, heterogeneous in intervention and with variable methodological quality.Specific attention given to the care of older and/or frail people with moderate to major trauma in the North American context resulted in improvements to in-hospital processes and clinical outcomes, but highlights a relative paucity of evidence, particularly in relation to the first 48 hours post-injury. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review supports the need for, and further research into an intervention to address the care of frail and/or older patients with major trauma, and for the careful definition of age and frailty in relation to moderate or major trauma. INTERNATIONAL PROSPECTIVE REGISTER OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS PROSPERO: CRD42016032895.

The Use of Tranexamic Acid in Hip Fracture Surgery-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the effect of intravenous tranexamic acid (TXA) on blood transfusion requirements in adult patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Secondary aim was to evaluate the safety by assessing thromboembolic events. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, PubMed, and Embase were searched for randomized controlled trials published in English from 2010. STUDY SELECTION: Studies eligible for inclusion were randomized controlled trials that analyzed the use of intravenous TXA on blood transfusion requirement in hip fracture surgery. DATA EXTRACTION: Titles and abstracts were screened and assessed for eligibility by 2 independent reviewers. Quality and risk of bias was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB2). DATA SYNTHESIS: Meta-analysis with random and fixed effect models was performed. Risk ratio (RR) was calculated for dichotomous outcomes and estimated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, the risk difference (RD) was estimated with a 95% CI. RESULTS: A total of 13 trials involving 1194 patients were included. Pooled results showed that patients in the TXA group had significantly lower transfusion requirements (RR 0.50, 95%CI 0.30-0.84, P = 0.009). Similar findings were observed in the subcohort of patients with transfusion threshold of Hb < 8g/dL, (RR 0.42, 95%CI 0.31-0.56, P < 0.0001). This risk reduction was not observed in the subcohort of patients with transfusion threshold of Hb 8.1-10g/dL who received TXA (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.51-1.18, P = 0.23) and no statistically significant differences were found for total thromboembolic events (RR 0.01, 95%CI -0.02-0.04, P = 0.47). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that intravenous TXA reduced blood transfusion rates and did not increase the risk of thromboembolic events. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Provision of acute care pathways for older major trauma patients in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of specific pathways of care for older trauma patients has been shown to decrease hospital length of stay and the overall rate of complications. The extent and scope of pathways and services for older major trauma patients in the UK is not currently known. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to map the current care pathways and provision of services for older people following major trauma in the UK. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of UK hospitals delivering care to major trauma patients (major trauma centres and trauma units). Data were collected on respondent and site characteristics, and local definitions of older trauma patients. To explore pathways for older people with major trauma, four clinical case examples were devised and respondents asked to complete responses that best illustrated the admission pathway for each. RESULTS: Responses from 56 hospitals were included in the analysis, including from 25 (84%) of all major trauma centres (MTCs) in the UK. The majority of respondents defined 'old' by chronological age, most commonly patients 65 years and over. The specialty team with overall responsibility for the patient in trauma units was most likely to be acute medicine or acute surgery. Patients in MTCs were not always admitted under the care of the major trauma service. Assessment by a geriatrician within 72 hours of admission varied in both major trauma centres and trauma units and was associated with increased age. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights variability in the admitting specialty team and subsequent management of older major trauma patients across hospitals in the UK. Variability appears to be related to patient condition as well as provision of local resources. Whilst lack of standardisation may be a result of local service configuration this has the potential to impact negatively on quality of care, multi-disciplinary working, and outcomes.

Sex discrimination after injury: is inequity in tranexamic acid administration just the tip of the iceberg?

There is emerging evidence of inequalities in healthcare provision between women and men. Trauma care is no exception with a number of studies indicating lower levels of prioritisation for injured female patients. The antifibrinolytic drug tranexamic acid, reduced trauma deaths to a similar extent in females and males in the international Clinical Randomisation of an Antifibrinolytic in Significant Haemorrhage (CRASH) randomised controlled trials, but in real-world practice, national registry data shows females are less likely to receive tranexamic acid than males. Inequity in the provision of tranexamic acid may extend beyond sex (and gender), and further study is required to examine the effect of age and mechanism of injury differences between men and women in the decision to treat.

The efficacy of weight-based enoxaparin dosing for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in trauma patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Trauma patients are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), and standard dosing enoxaparin regimens may be inadequate for prophylaxis. This meta-analysis was performed to clarify the efficacy of alternative dosing regimens for VTE prophylaxis in this high-risk group. The objective of this systematic review was to review the evidence regarding weight-based dosing of enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis in trauma patients. METHODS: A systematic database search was undertaken for studies comparing standard versus weight-based dosing of enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis in adult trauma patients, 18 years or older. The primary outcome was the achievement of anti-factor Xa (AFXa) levels within the prophylactic range. Secondary outcomes included subprophylactic AFXa levels, supraprophylactic AFXa levels, VTE incidence, and bleeding events. Meta-analysis was conducted using both fixed- and random-effects models, and presented as odds ratios, risk ratios (RRs), and risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Four cohort studies were eligible for inclusion. Compared with standard dosing, weight-based enoxaparin prophylaxis dosing was associated with increased odds of prophylactic AFXa levels (odds ratio, 5.85; 95% CI, 3.02-11.30; p < 0.00001) and reduced risk of subprophylactic AFXa levels (RR, 3.97; 95% CI, 3.02-5.22; p < 0.00001). Standard dosing was associated with a reduced risk of supratherapeutic AFXa levels (RR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.50; p = 0.0002), but this was not associated with a difference in risk of bleeding events (RD, -0.00; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.01; p = 0.55). There was no statistical difference in incidence VTE between the two groups (RD, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.03; p = 0.64). CONCLUSION: Compared with standard dosing, weight-based enoxaparin dosing regimens are associated with increased odds of prophylactic range AFXa levels. Further investigation is required to determine if this translates into improved VTE prophylaxis and reduced VTE incidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis; Level III.

Long term outcomes following rib fracture fixation in patients with major chest trauma.

BACKGROUND: Severe chest injuries are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Surgical rib fixation has become a more commonplace procedure to improve chest wall mechanics, pain, and function. The aim of this study was to characterise the epidemiology and long-term functional outcomes of chest trauma patients who underwent rib fixation in a major trauma centre (MTC). METHODOLOGY: This was a retrospective review (2014-19) of all adult patients with significant chest injury who had rib fixation surgery following blunt trauma to the chest. The primary outcome was functional recovery after hospital discharge, and secondary outcomes included length of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay, maximum organ support, tracheostomy insertion, ventilator days. RESULTS: 60 patients underwent rib fixation. Patients were mainly male (82%) with median age 52 (range 24-83) years, injury severity score (ISS) of 29 (21-38), 10 (4-19) broken ribs, and flail segment in 90% of patients. Forty-six patients (77%) had a good outcome (GOSE grade 6-8). Patients in the poor outcome group (23%; GOSE 1-5) tended to be older [55 (39-83) years vs. 51 (24-78); p = 0.05] and had longer length of hospital stay [42 (19-82) days vs. 24 (7-90); p<0.01]. Injury severity, rate of mechanical ventilation or organ dysfunction did not affect long term outcome. Nineteen patients (32%) were not mechanically ventilated. CONCLUSIONS: Rib fixation was associated with good long-term outcomes in severely injured patients. Age was the only predictor of long-term outcome. The results suggest that rib fixation be considered in patients with severe chest injuries and may also benefit those who are not mechanically ventilated but are at risk of deterioration.

Multiple Organ Dysfunction in Older Major Trauma Critical Care Patients: A Multicenter Prospective Observational Study.

The objective was to explore the characteristics and outcomes of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) in older trauma patients. Background: Severely injured older people present an increasing challenge for trauma systems. Recovery for those who require critical care may be complicated by MODS. In older trauma patients, MODS may not be predictable based on chronological age alone and factors associated with its development and resolution are unclear. Methods: Consecutive adult patients (aged ≥16 years) admitted to 4 level 1 major trauma center critical care units were enrolled and reviewed daily until discharge or death. MODS was defined by a daily total sequential organ failure assessment score of >5. Results: One thousand three hundred sixteen patients were enrolled over 18 months and one-third (434) were aged ≥65 years. Incidence of MODS was high for both age groups (<65 years: 64%, ≥65 years: 70%). There were few differences in severity, patterns, and duration of MODS between cohorts, except for older traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients who experienced a prolonged course of MODS recovery (TBI: 9 days vs no TBI: 5 days, P < 0.01). Frailty rather than chronological age had a strong association with MODS development (odds ratio [OR], 6.9; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 3.0-12.4; P < 0.001) and MODS mortality (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.31-3.38; P = 0.02). Critical care resource utilization was not increased in older patients, but MODS had a substantial impact on mortality (<65 years: 17%; ≥65 years: 28%). The majority of older patients who did not develop MODS survived and had favorable discharge outcomes (home discharge ≥65 years NoMODS: 50% vs MODS: 15%; P < 0.01). Conclusions: Frailty rather than chronological age appears to drive MODS development, recovery, and outcome in older cohorts. Early identification of frailty after trauma may help to predict MODS and plan care in older trauma.

Refining mass casualty plans with simulation-based iterative learning.

BACKGROUND: Preparatory, written plans for mass casualty incidents are designed to help hospitals deliver an effective response. However, addressing the frequently observed mismatch between planning and delivery of effective responses to mass casualty incidents is a key challenge. We aimed to use simulation-based iterative learning to bridge this gap. METHODS: We used Normalisation Process Theory as the framework for iterative learning from mass casualty incident simulations. Five small-scale 'focused response' simulations generated learning points that were fed into two large-scale whole-hospital response simulations. Debrief notes were used to improve the written plans iteratively. Anonymised individual online staff surveys tracked learning. The primary outcome was system safety and latent errors identified from group debriefs. The secondary outcomes were the proportion of completed surveys, confirmation of reporting location, and respective roles for mass casualty incidents. RESULTS: Seven simulation exercises involving more than 700 staff and multidisciplinary responses were completed with debriefs. Usual emergency care was not affected by simulations. Each simulation identified latent errors and system safety issues, including overly complex processes, utilisation of space, and the need for clarifying roles. After the second whole hospital simulation, participants were more likely to return completed surveys (odds ratio=2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-4.3). Repeated exercises resulted in respondents being more likely to know where to report (odds ratio=4.3; 95% CI, 2.5-7.3) and their respective roles (odds ratio=3.7; 95% CI, 2.2-6.1) after a simulated mass casualty incident was declared. CONCLUSION: Simulation exercises are a useful tool to improve mass casualty incident plans iteratively and continuously through hospital-wide engagement of staff.

At risk child: a contemporary analysis of injured children in London and the South East of England: a prospective, multicentre cohort study.

Background: Injury is a leading health burden in children yet relatively little is reported about the contemporary risks they face. Current national registry data may under-represent the true burden of injury to children. We aim to analyse contemporary patterns of paediatric trauma and identify current factors putting children at risk of injury. Methods: A 3-month prospective multicentre cohort evaluation of injured children across the London Major Trauma System was performed. All children receiving a trauma team activation; meeting National Institute for Health and Care Excellence CT head criteria; or admitted/transferred out due to trauma were included. Data were collected on demographics, mechanism and location of injury, and body region injured. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcome was safeguarding concerns. Results: 659 children were included. Young children were more likely to be injured at home (0-5 years old: 70.8%, n=167 vs adolescents: 15.6%, n=31). Adolescents were more likely to be injured in the street (42.7%, n=85). Head trauma caused over half of injuries in 0-5 years old (51.9%, n=121). Falls were common and increasingly prevalent in younger children, causing 56.6% (n=372) of injuries. In adolescents, penetrating violence caused more than one in five injuries (21.9%, n=50). Most injured children survived (99.8%, n=658), however, one in four (26.1%, n=172) had safeguarding concerns and a quarter of adolescents had police, third sector or external agency involvement (23.2%, n=53). Conclusions: This study describes modern-day paediatric trauma and highlights the variance in injury patterns in young children and adolescents. Importantly, it highlights differences in actual rates of injuries compared with those reported from current national registry data. We must understand real risks facing 21st century children to effectively safeguard future generations. The results provide an opportunity to reassess the current approach to injury prevention, child and adolescent safeguarding, and public health campaigns for child safety.