Evaluation of prehospital preparedness for major incidents on a national level, with focus on mass casualty incidents.

PURPOSE: To investigate prehospital preparedness work for Mass Casualty Incidents (MCI) and Major Incidents (MI) in Norway. METHOD: A national cross-sectional descriptive study of Norway's prehospital MI preparedness through a web-based survey. A representative selection of Rescue and Emergency Services were included, excluding Non-Governmental Organisations and military. The survey consisted of 59 questions focused on organisation, planning, education/training, exercises and evaluation. RESULTS: Totally, 151/157 (96%) respondents answered the survey. The results showed variance regarding contingency planning for MCI/MI, revisions of the plans, use of national triage guidelines, knowledge requirements, as well as haemostatic and tactical first aid skills training. Participation in interdisciplinary on-going life-threatening violence (PLIVO) exercises was high among Ambulance, Police and Fire/Rescue Emergency Services. Simulations of terrorist attacks or disasters with multiple injured the last five years were reported by 21/151 (14%) on a regional level and 74/151 (48%) on a local level. Evaluation routines after MCI/MI events were reported by half of the respondents (75/151) and 70/149 (47%) described a dedicated function to perform such evaluation. CONCLUSION: The study indicates considerable variance and gaps among Prehospital Rescue and Emergency Services in Norway regarding MCI/MI preparedness work, calling for national benchmarks, minimum requirements, follow-up routines of the organisations and future reassessments. Implementation of mandatory PLIVO exercises seems to have contributed to interdisciplinary exercises between Fire/Rescue, Police and Ambulance Emergency Service. Repeated standardised surveys can be a useful tool to assess and follow-up the MI preparedness work among Prehospital Rescue and Emergency Services at a national, regional and local level.

Comorbidities, injury severity and complications predict mortality in thoracic trauma.

PURPOSE: Thoracic trauma accounts for 25-50% of posttraumatic mortality. Data on epidemiology of thoracic trauma in Scandinavia and risk factors for mortality are scarce. This study aims to provide an overview of epidemiology, clinical events and risk factors for mortality of patients with severe thoracic injuries. METHODS: A retrospective study including adult thoracic trauma patients with abbreviated injury scale ≥ 3, between 2009 and 2018 at Haukeland University Hospital was performed. Subgroup analyses were performed for specific patient groups: (1) isolated thoracic trauma, (2) polytrauma without Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and (3) polytrauma with TBI. Logistic regression analyses were applied to find risk factors for 30-days mortality. Age, sex, comorbidity polypharmacy score (CPS), trauma and injury severity score (TRISS) and comprehensive complication index (CI) were included in the final model. RESULTS: Data of 514 patients were analyzed, of which 60 (12%) patients died. Median (IQR) injury severity score (ISS) was 17 (13-27). Data of 463 patients, of which 39 patients died (8%), were included in multivariate analyses. Female sex odds ratio (OR) (2.7, p = 0.04), CPS > 9 (OR 4.8; p = 0.01), TRISS ≤ 50% (OR 44; p < 0.001) and CI ≥ 30 (OR 12.5, p < 0.001) were significant risk factors for mortality. Subgroup analyses did not demonstrate other risk factors. CONCLUSION: Comorbidities and associated pharmacotherapies, TRISS, female sex, and complications during admission predict in-hospital mortality after thoracic trauma. Current findings might help to recognize patients at risk of an adverse outcome, and thereby prevent complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: RETROSPECTIVELY REGISTERED: The regional committees for medical and health research ethics file number is 2017/293.

Differences in characteristics between patients ≥ 65 and < 65 years of age with orthopaedic injuries after severe trauma.

AIM: Many trauma patients have associated orthopaedic injuries at admission. The existing literature regarding orthopaedic trauma often focuses on single injuries, but there is a paucity of information that gives an overview of this group of patients. Our aim was to describe the differences in characteristics between polytrauma patients ≥ 65 and < 65 years of age suffering orthopaedic injuries. METHODS: Patients registered in the Norwegian Trauma Registry (NTR) with an injury severity score (ISS) > 15 and orthopaedic injuries, who were admitted to Haukeland University Hospital in 2016-2018, were included. Data retrieved from the patients' hospital records and NTR were analysed. The patients were divided into two groups based on age. RESULTS: The study comprised 175 patients, of which 128 (73%) and 47 (27%) were aged < 65 (Group 1) and ≥ 65 years (Group 2), respectively. The ISS and the new injury severity score (NISS) were similar in both groups. The dominating injury mechanism was traffic-related and thoracic injury was the most common location of main injury in both groups. The groups suffered a similar number of orthopaedic injuries. A significantly higher proportion of Group 1 underwent operative treatment for their orthopaedic injuries than in Group 2 (74% vs. 53%). The mortality in Group 2 was significantly higher than that in Group 1 (15% vs. 3%). In Group 2 most deaths were related to traffic injuries (71%). High energy falls and traffic-related incidents caused the same number of deaths in Group 1. In Group 1 abdominal injuries resulted in most deaths, while head injuries was the primary reason for deaths in Group 2. CONCLUSIONS: Although the ISS and NISS were similar, mortality was significantly higher among patients aged ≥ 65 years compared to patients < 65 years of age. The younger age group underwent more frequently surgery for orthopaedic injuries than the elderly. There may be multiple reasons for this difference, but our study does not have sufficient data to draw any conclusions. Future studies may provide a deeper understanding of what causes treatment variation between age groups, which would hopefully help to further develop strategies to improve outcome for the elderly polytrauma patient.

PROSE: Prospective Randomized Trial of the On-X Mechanical Prosthesis and the St Jude Medical Mechanical Prosthesis Evaluation: Part 2: Study results-prostheses, positions, and economic development.

Objectives: The Prospective Randomized On-X Mechanical Prosthesis Versus St Jude Medical Mechanical Prosthesis Evaluation (PROSE) trial purpose was to investigate whether a current-generation mechanical prosthesis (On-X; On-X Life Technologies/Artivion Inc) reduced the incidence of thromboembolic-related complications compared with a previous-generation mechanical prosthesis (St Jude Medical Mechanical Prosthesis; Abbott/St Jude Medical). This second report documents the valve-related complications by individual prostheses and by Western and Developing populations. Methods: The PROSE trial study was conducted in 28 worldwide centers and incorporated 855 subjects randomized between 2003 and 2016. The study enrollment was discontinued on August 31, 2016. The study protocol, and analyses of 10 demographic variables and 24 risk factors were published in detail in 2021. Results: The total patient population (N = 855) included patients receiving an On-X valve (n = 462) and a St Jude Medical valve (n = 393). The overall freedom evaluation showed no differences at 5 years between the prostheses for thromboembolism or for valve thrombosis. There were also no differences in mortality. There were several differences between Developing and Western populations. The freedom relations at 5 years for mortality favored Western over Developing populations. Valve thrombosis was differentiated by position and site: aortic < mitral (P = .007) and Western < Developing (P = .005). In the mitral position there were no cases in Western populations, whereas there were 8 in Developing populations (P = .217). Conclusions: The On-X valve and St Jude Medical valve performed equally well in the study with no differences found. The only differentiation occurred with valve thrombosis in the mitral position more than the aortic position and occurring in Developing more than Western populations. The occurrence of valve thrombosis was also related to a younger population possibly due to anticoagulation compliance based on record review.

PROSE: Prospective Randomized Trial of the On-X Mechanical Prosthesis and the St Jude Medical Mechanical Prosthesis Evaluation : Part 1(Patient Dynamics): Preoperative demographics and preoperative and operative risk factors.

OBJECTIVES: The PROSE trial purpose is to investigate whether the incidence of thromboembolic-related complications is reduced with a current generation mechanical prosthesis (On-X Life Technologies/CryoLife Inc.-On-X) compared with a previous generation mechanical prosthesis (St Jude Medical-SJM). The primary purpose of the initial report is to document the preoperative demographics, and the preoperative and operative risk factors by individual prosthesis and by Western and Developing populations. METHODS: The PROSE study was conducted in 28 worldwide centres and incorporated 855 subjects randomized between 2003 and 2016. The study enrollment was discontinued on August 31, 2016. The preoperative demographics incorporated age, gender, functional class, etiology, prosthetic degeneration, primary rhythm, primary valve lesion, weight, height, BSA and BMI. The preoperative and operative evaluation incorporated 24 risk factors. RESULTS: The total patient population (855) incorporated On-X population (462) and the St Jude Medical population (393). There was no significant difference of any of the preoperative demographics between the On-X and SJM groups. The preoperative and operative risk factors evaluation showed there was no significant difference between the On-X and St Jude Medical populations. The preoperative and operative risk factors by valve position (aortic and mitral) also documented no differentiation. The dominant preoperative demographics of the Western world population were older age, male gender, sinus rhythm, aortic stenosis, congenital aortic lesion, and mitral regurgitation. The dominant demographics of the Developing world population were rheumatic etiology, atrial fibrillation, aortic regurgitation, mixed aortic lesions, mitral stenosis and mixed mitral lesions. The Developing world group had only one significant risk factor, congestive heart failure. The majority of the preoperative and operative risk factors were significant in the Western world population. CONCLUSIONS: The preoperative demographics do not differentiate the prostheses but do differentiate the Western and Developing world populations. The preoperative and operative risk factors do not differentiate the prostheses BUT do differentiate the Western and Developing world populations.