Too Big, Too Small or Just Right? Why the 28 French Chest Tube Is the Best Size.

BACKGROUND: Tube thoracostomy is a commonly performed procedure in trauma patients. The optimal chest tube size is unknown. This study measures chest tube drainage in a controlled laboratory setting and compares measured flowrates to those predicted by the Hagen-Poiseuille equation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A model of massive hemothorax was created, consisting of a basin containing synthetic blood substitute (aqueous Glycerin and Xanthan gum) and a standard pleur-evac setup at -20 cm H2O suction. Flow measurements were calculated by measuring the time to drain 2L of blood substitute from the basin. Chest tube sizes tested were 20F, 24F, 28F, 32F, and 36F. Thoracostomy opening was modeled using custom built device that represents two ribs, with the distance between varied 2 to 12 mm. Flowrate increases were compared against predicted increases according to the Hagen-Poiseuille equation. Percent of predicted increase was calculated, both incremental increase and using 20F tube benchmark. RESULTS: All tubes were occluded at a 2 mm thoracostomy opening. At 3 mm, 32F and 36F were occluded while smaller tubes were patent. Tubes 28F and larger exhibited high speed and consistent flowrates, even after decreasing thoracostomy opening down to 7 mm, while flowrates rapidly decreased at opening smaller than 7 mm. Smaller 24F and 20F tubes exhibited highly variable flowrates through the system. Maximum flowrates were 21.7, 36.8, 49.6, 55.6, and 61.0 mL/s for 20F-36F tubes, respectively. The incremental increase in flow ratio for increasing chest tube size was 1.69 (20F to 24F), 1.35 (24F to 28F), 1.12 (28F to 32F), and 1.10 (32F to 36F). CONCLUSIONS: The 28F chest tube exhibited high and consistent velocity, while smaller tubes were slower and more variable. Larger tubes offered only slightly higher flowrates. The 28F is a good balance of reasonable size and high flowrate and is likely the optimal size for most clinical applications.

Effect of prehospital tourniquets on resuscitation in extremity arterial trauma.

BACKGROUND: Timely tourniquet placement may limit ongoing hemorrhage and reduce the need for blood products. This study evaluates if prehospital tourniquet application altered the initial transfusion needs in arterial injuries when compared with a non-tourniquet control group. METHODS: Extremity arterial injuries were queried from our level I trauma center registry from 2013 to 2017. The characteristics of the cohort with prehospital tourniquet placement (TQ+) were described in terms of tourniquet use, duration, and frequency over time. These cases were matched 1:1 by the artery injured, demographics, Injury Severity Score, and mechanism of injury to patients arriving without a tourniquet (TQ-). The primary outcome was transfusion within the first 24 hours, with secondary outcomes of morbidity (rhabdomyolysis, renal failure, compartment syndrome), amputation (initial vs. delayed), and length of stay. Statistical tests included t-test and χ2 for continuous and categorical variables, respectively, with p<0.05 considered as significant. RESULTS: Extremity arterial injuries occurred in 192 patients, with 69 (36%) having prehospital tourniquet placement for an average of 78 minutes. Tourniquet use increased over time from 9% (2013) to 62% (2017). TQ+ patients were predominantly male (81%), with a mean age of 35.0 years. Forty-six (67%) received blood transfusion within the first 24 hours. In the matched comparison (n=69 pairs), TQ+ patients had higher initial heart rate (110 vs. 100, p=0.02), frequency of transfusion (67% vs. 48%, p<0.01), and initial amputations (23% vs. 6%, p<0.01). TQ+ patients had increased frequency of initial amputation regardless of upper (n=43 pairs) versus lower (n=26 pairs) extremity involvement; however, only upper extremity TQ+ patients had increased transfusion frequency and volume. No difference was observed in morbidity, length of stay, and mortality with tourniquet use. DISCUSSION: Tourniquet use has increased over time in patients with extremity arterial injuries. Patients having prehospital tourniquets required a higher frequency of transfusion and initial amputation, without an increase in complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level IV.

Selective use of pericardial window and drainage as sole treatment for hemopericardium from penetrating chest trauma.

BACKGROUND: Penetrating cardiac injuries (PCIs) are highly lethal, and a sternotomy is considered mandatory for suspected PCI. Recent literature suggests pericardial window (PCW) may be sufficient for superficial cardiac injuries to drain hemopericardium and assess for continued bleeding and instability. This study objective is to review patients with PCI managed with sternotomy and PCW and compare outcomes. METHODS: All patients with penetrating chest trauma from 2000 to 2016 requiring PCW or sternotomy were reviewed. Data were collected for patients who had PCW for hemopericardium managed with only pericardial drain, or underwent sternotomy for cardiac injuries grade 1-3 according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Cardiac Organ Injury Scale (OIS). The PCW+drain group was compared with the Sternotomy group using Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum test with P<0.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Sternotomy was performed in 57 patients for suspected PCI, including 7 with AAST OIS grade 1-3 injuries (Sternotomy group). Four patients had pericardial injuries, three had partial thickness cardiac injuries, two of which were suture-repaired. Average blood drained was 285 mL (100-500 mL). PCW was performed in 37 patients, and 21 had hemopericardium; 16 patients proceeded to sternotomy and 5 were treated with pericardial drainage (PCW+drain group). All PCW+drain patients had suction evacuation of hemopericardium, pericardial lavage, and verified bleeding cessation, followed by pericardial drain placement and admission to intensive care unit (ICU). Average blood drained was 240 mL (40-600 mL), and pericardial drains were removed on postoperative day 3.6 (2-5). There was no significant difference in demographics, injury mechanism, Revised Trauma Score exploratory laparotomies, hospital or ICU length of stay, or ventilator days. No in-hospital mortality occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating chest trauma and hemopericardium may be safely managed with PCW, lavage and drainage with documented cessation of bleeding, and postoperative ICU monitoring. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level IV.

Implementation of a CT scan practice guideline for pediatric trauma patients reduces unnecessary scans without impacting outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Computed tomography (CT) scans are useful in the evaluation of trauma patients, but are costly and pose risks from ionizing radiation in children. Recent literature has demonstrated the use of CT scan guidelines in the management of pediatric trauma. The study objective is to review our treatment of pediatric blunt trauma patients and evaluate CT use before and after CT-guideline implementation. METHODS: Our Pediatric Level 2 Trauma Center (TC) implemented a CT scan practice guideline for pediatric trauma patients in March 2014. The guideline recommended for or against CT of the head and abdomen/pelvis using published criteria from the Pediatric Emergency Care and Research Network. There was no chest CT guideline. We reviewed all pediatric trauma patients for CT scans obtained during initial evaluation before and after guideline implementation, excluding inpatient scans. The Trauma Registry Database was queried to include all pediatric (age < 15) trauma patients seen in our TC from 2010 to 2016, excluding penetrating mechanism and deaths in the TC. Scans were considered positive if organ injury was detected. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients undergoing CT and percent positive CTs. Secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay, readmissions, and mortality. Categorical and continuous variables were analyzed with χ and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, respectively. p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: We identified 1,934 patients: 1,106 pre- and 828 post-guideline. Absolute reductions in head, chest, and abdomen/pelvis CT scans were 17.7%, 11.5%, and 18.8%, respectively (p < 0.001). Percent positive head CTs were equivalent, but percent positive chest and abdomen CT increased after implementation. Secondary outcomes were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a pediatric CT guideline significantly decreases CT use, reducing the radiation exposure without a difference in outcome. Trauma centers treating pediatric patients should adopt similar guidelines to decrease unnecessary CT scans in children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level IV.

Evaluating the traditional day and night shift in an acute care surgery fellowship: Is the swing shift a better choice?

BACKGROUND: Fellowship trainees in acute care surgery require experience in the management of complex and operative trauma cases. Trauma center staffing usually follows standard 12-hour or 24-hour shifts, with resident and fellow trainees following a similar schedule. Although trauma admissions can be generally unpredictable, we analyzed temporal trends of trauma patient arrival times to determine the best time frame to maximize trainee experience during each day. METHODS: We reviewed 10 years (2007-2016) of trauma registry data for blunt and penetrating trauma activations. Hourly volumetric trends were observed, and three specific events were chosen for detailed analysis: (1) trauma activation with Injury Severity Score (ISS) greater than 15, (2) laparotomy for trauma, and (3) thoracotomy for trauma. 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. A swing shift was chosen because it captures the peak volume for all three events. Means and 95% confidence intervals were calculated, and comparisons were made between shifts using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test with Bonferroni correction, and p less than 0.05 considered significant. RESULTS: During the 10-year study period, 28,287 patients were treated at our trauma center. This included the evaluation and management of 7,874 patients with ISS greater than 15, performance of 1,766 laparotomies, and 392 thoracotomies for trauma. Swing shift was superior to both day and night shifts for ISS greater than 15 (p < 0.001). Both swing and night shifts were superior to day shift for laparotomies (p < 0.001). Swing shift was superior to both day shift (p < 0.001) and night shift (p = 0.031). Shifts with the highest yield of ISS greater than 15, laparotomies, and thoracotomies include night and swing shifts on Fridays and Saturdays. CONCLUSION: Projected experience of acute care surgery fellows in managing complex trauma patients increases with the integration of swing shifts into the schedule. Daily trauma volume follows a temporal pattern which, when used correctly, can increase trainee exposure to complex and operative trauma cases. We encourage other centers to analyze their volume and adjust trainee schedules accordingly to maximize their educational experience. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level IV.

Pre-injury polypharmacy predicts mortality in isolated severe traumatic brain injury patients.

BACKGROUND: The use of 5 or more medications is defined as polypharmacy (PPM). The clinical impact of PPM on the isolated severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) patient has not been defined. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed at our academic level 1 trauma center examining patients with isolated TBI. Pre-injury medications were reviewed, and inhospital mortality was the primary measured outcome. RESULTS: There were 698 patients with an isolated TBI over the 5-year study period; 177 (25.4%) patients reported pre-injury PPM. There were 18 (10.2%) deaths in the PPM cohort and 24 (4.6%) deaths in the non-PPM cohort (P < .0001). Stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed a 2.3 times greater risk of mortality in the PPM patients (P = .019). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-injury PPM increases mortality in patients with isolated severe TBI. This knowledge may provide opportunities for intervention in this population.

International rotations: A valuable source to supplement operative experience for acute-care surgery, trauma, and surgical critical care fellows.

BACKGROUND: Acute-care surgery (ACS), trauma, and surgical critical care (SCC) fellowships graduate fellows deemed qualified to perform complex cases immediately upon graduation. We hypothesize international fellow rotations can be a resource to supplement operative case exposure. METHODS: A survey was sent to all program directors (PDs) of ACS and SCC fellowships via e-mail. Data were captured and analyzed using the REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) tool. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 113 PDs, with a response rate of 42%. Most fellows performed less than 150 operative cases (59.5%). The majority of PDs thought the operative exposure either could be improved or was not enough to ensure expertise in trauma and emergent general surgery. Only a minority of the PDs found their case load exceptional (can be improved: 43%, not enough: 30% exceptional: 27%). Most PDs thought an international experience could supplement the breadth of cases, provide research opportunities, and improve understanding of trauma systems (70%). Ten sites offered international rotations (70%). Most fellowships would be willing to provide reciprocity to the host institution (90%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of PDs for ACS, trauma, and SCC programs perceive a need for increased quality and quantity of operative cases. The majority recognize international fellow rotations as a valuable tool to supplement fellows' education.

Acute care surgery fellowship graduates' practice patterns: The additional training is an asset.

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Acute Care Surgery (ACS) fellowship program has matured to 20 verified programs. As part of an ongoing curricular evaluation, we queried the current practice patterns of the graduates of ACS fellowship programs regarding their view on their ACS training. We hypothesized that the majority of ACS fellowship graduates would be practicing ACS in academic Level I trauma centers and that fellowship training was pivotal in their career. METHODS: Graduates of American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-certified ACS fellowships completed an online survey that included practice demographics, specific categories of cases delineated by the current ACS curriculum, and perceived impact of training. RESULTS: Surveys were submitted by 56 of 77 graduates for a completion rate of 73%. The majority of respondents were male (68%) aged 40 years or younger (80%). All but four completed ACS fellowship training in last 5 years (93%), and 83% completed fellowship in the last 3 years. Regarding their current practice, broadly defined ACS predominated (96%) with 2% practicing only trauma surgery and 2% only general surgery. Practice settings were 64% urban, 29% suburban, and 7% rural locations, with 84% of graduates practicing in a hospital-based group. The practitioner's hospital was identified as university/university-affiliated in 53%, community in 38%, and military in 9%, with 91% identified as a teaching hospital; trauma designation was identified as Level I (55%), Level II (39%), and other (6%). The graduates' average current practice mix is 10% elective general surgery, 29% emergency general surgery, 32% trauma, 25% surgical critical care, and 4% other (burn, bariatric, vascular, and thoracic). Only 16% of graduates do not perform elective cases. Case specifics demonstrated 92% of graduates perform vascular cases, 88% perform thoracic cases, and 70% perform complex hepatobiliary. Practice elements that were satisfiers included (1) scope of practice, (2) case mix, (3) percentage emergency general surgery, (4) lifestyle, (5) case complexity (with 3 and 4 tied). Graduates agreed the ACS fellowship training prepared them well for practice and was worth the time invested (both 82%), increased their marketability and self-confidence (80%), and prepared them well for academics (71%) and administration (63%). Of those surveyed, 93% would encourage others to do an ACS fellowship. CONCLUSION: Although 93% of graduates practice in urban/suburban areas, there was a mixture of university, university-affiliated, and community institutions and an almost even division of Levels I and II designation. Graduates demonstrate ongoing use of their acquired advanced operative training, particularly in vascular and thoracic surgery. The majority of ACS fellowship graduates were practicing ACS and felt fellowship training was valuable in their career path and that they would recommend it to others.

Research: Testing of a Novel Portable Body Temperature Conditioner Using a Thermal Manikin.

A battery-operated active cooling/heating device was developed to maintain thermoregulation of trauma victims in austere environments while awaiting evacuation to a hospital for further treatment. The use of a thermal manikin was adopted for this study in order to simulate load testing and evaluate the performance of this novel portable active cooling/heating device for both continuous (external power source) and battery power. The performance of the portable body temperature conditioner (PBTC) was evaluated through cooling/heating fraction tests to analyze the heat transfer between a thermal manikin and circulating water blanket to show consistent performance while operating under battery power. For the cooling/heating fraction tests, the ambient temperature was set to 15°C ± 1°C (heating) and 30°C ± 1°C (cooling). The PBTC water temperature was set to 37°C for the heating mode tests and 15°C for the cooling mode tests. The results showed consistent performance of the PBTC in terms of cooling/heating capacity while operating under both continuous and battery power. The PBTC functioned as intended and shows promise as a portable warming/cooling device for operation in the field.

Minimally invasive is maximally effective: Diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy for penetrating abdominal injuries.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic techniques have evolved, allowing increased capabilities within most subspecialties of general surgery, but have failed to gain traction managing injured patients. We hypothesized that laparoscopy is effective in the diagnosis and treatment of penetrating abdominal injuries. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing abdominal exploration following penetrating trauma at our Level 1 trauma center during a 6-year period from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2013. Demographic and resuscitation data were obtained from our trauma registry. Charts were reviewed for operative details, hospital course, and complications. Hospital length of stay (LOS) and complications were primary end points. Patients were classified as having nontherapeutic diagnostic laparoscopy (DL), nontherapeutic diagnostic celiotomy (DC), therapeutic laparoscopy (TL), or therapeutic celiotomy (TC). TL patients were case-matched 2:1 with TC patients having similar intra-abdominal injuries. RESULTS: A total of 518 patients, including 281 patients (55%) with stab wounds and 237 patients (45%) with gunshot wounds, were identified. Celiotomy was performed in 380 patients (73%), laparoscopy in 138 (27%), with 44 (32%) converted to celiotomy. Nontherapeutic explorations were compared including 70 DLs and 46 DCs with similar injury severity. LOS was shorter in DLs compared with DCs (1 day vs. 4 days, p < 0.001). There were no missed injuries. Therapeutic explorations were compared by matching all TL patients 2:1 to TC patients with similar type and severity of injuries. Twenty-four patients underwent TL compared with 48 TC patients in the case matched group. LOS was shorter in the TL group than in the TC group (4 days vs. 2 days, p < 0.001). Wound infections were more common with open exploration (10.4% vs. 0%, p = 0.002), and more patients developed ileus or small bowel obstruction after open exploration (9.4% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy is safe and accurate in penetrating abdominal injuries. The use of laparoscopy resulted in shorter hospitalization, fewer postoperative wound infection and ileus complications, as well as no missed injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level IV.

Defining the acute care surgery curriculum.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to define the gaps in essential and desirable (E/D) case volumes that may prompt reevaluation of the acute care surgery (ACS) curriculum or restructuring of the training provided. METHODS: A review of the first 2 years of ACS case log entry (July 2011 to June 2013) was performed. Individual trainee logs were evaluated to determine how often they performed each case on the E/D list. Trainees described cases using current procedural terminology codes, which had been previously mapped to the E/D list. RESULTS: There were 29 trainees from 15 programs (Year 1) and 30 trainees from 13 programs (Year 2) who participated in case log entry, with some overlap between the years. There were a total of 487 fellow-months of data with an average of 14.6 current procedural terminology codes per month and 175.5 per year for cases on the E/D list versus 12 and 143.5 for cases not on the E/D list, respectively. Overall, the most common essential cases were laparotomy for trauma (1,463; 705 in Year 1, 758 in Year 2), tracheostomy (665; 372 in Year 1, 293 in Year 2) and gastrostomy tubes (566; 289 in Year 1, 277 in Year 2). There are a total of 73 types of essential operations and 45 types of desirable operations in the current curriculum. There were 16 distinct codes (13.6%) never used, of which 6 overlapped with other codes. Based on body region, the 10 E/D codes never used by any fellow were as follows: one head/face, lateral canthotomy; five neck; elective neck dissections; one thoracic, vascular trauma to chest; three pediatrics, inguinal hernia repair and small bowel obstruction treatments. CONCLUSION: The current ACS trainees lack adequate head/neck and pediatric experience as defined by the ACS curriculum. Restructuring rotations at individual institutions and a focus on novel educational modalities may be needed to augment the individual institutional exposure. Reevaluation of the curriculum may be warranted.

How much and what type: analysis of the first year of the acute care surgery operative case log.

BACKGROUND: A case log was created by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Acute Care Surgery (ACS) committee to track trainee operative experiences, allowing them to enter their cases in the form of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. We hypothesized that the number of cases an ACS trainee performed would be similar to the expectations of a fifth-year general surgery resident and that the current list of essential and desired cases (E/D list) would accurately reflect cases done by ACS trainees. METHODS: The database was queried from July 1, 2011, to June 30, 2012. Trainees were classified as those in American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-accredited fellowships (ACC) and those in ACS fellowships not accredited (non-ACC). CPT codes were mapped to the E/D list. Cases entered manually were individually reviewed and assigned a CPT code if possible or listed as "noncodable." To compensate for nonoperative rotations and noncompliance, case numbers were analyzed both annually and monthly to estimate average case numbers for all trainees. In addition, case logs of trainees were compared with the E/D list to assess how well it reflected actual trainee experience. RESULTS: Eighteen ACC ACS and 11 non-ACC ACS trainees performed 16.4 (12.6) cases per month compared with 15.7 (14.2) cases for non-ACC ACS fellows (p = 0.71). When annualized, trainees performed, on average, 195 cases per year. Annual analysis led to similar results. The E/D list captured only approximately 50% of the trainees' operative experience. Only 77 cases were categorized as pediatric. CONCLUSION: ACS trainees have substantial operative experience averaging nearly 200 major cases during their ACS year. However, high variability exists in the number of essential or desirable cases being performed with approximately 50% of the fellows' operative experience falling outside the E/D list of cases. Modification of the fellows' operative experience and/or the rotation requirements seems to be needed to provide experience in E/D cases.

The effect of dead-on-arrival and emergency department death classification on risk-adjusted performance in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons' Trauma Quality Improvement Program is focused on identifying variations in outcomes across trauma centers for the purposes of performance improvement. In previous analyses, patients who died in the emergency department were excluded. We investigated the effect of inclusion and exclusion of emergency department (ED) deaths (dead on arrival [DOA] and died in ED [DIE]) on analyses of overall risk-adjusted trauma center performance. METHODS: Data for patients admitted to 65 Trauma Quality Improvement Program hospitals during the 2009 calendar year was used. A logistic regression model was developed to estimate risk-adjusted mortality. Trauma centers were then ranked based on their observed-to-expected (O/E) mortality ratio with 90% confidence intervals (CIs) and classified by outlier status: low outliers/high performers had a 90% CI for O/E mortality ratio of less than 1, and high outliers/low performers had a 90% CI for O/E mortality ratio of greater than 1. Changes in outlier status, rank, and quartile were examined with and without DOA and DIE patients included in the analyses to discern the impact of such exclusions on overall risk-adjusted center-specific performance. RESULTS: Thirty-one trauma centers (48%) reported no DOA patients in 2009, while 6 centers (9%) reported more than 10. Of 224 patients, 14 (6.2%) had a documented time of death of more than 30 minutes after ED arrival despite being recorded as DOA. Forty-one trauma centers (63%) changed rank by three positions or less. Ten trauma centers changed their quartile ranking by a single quartile, but no centers were found to change quartile rank more than one quartile. Changes in outlier status occurred for 6 trauma centers (9%). CONCLUSION: The relative frequency of patients classified as DOA varies greatly between trauma centers. Misclassification of patients as DOA occurs. Inclusion of ED deaths in risk-adjusted analysis of mortality results in a small but insignificant change in predicting the outcome results of a trauma center. This change is less than the rate of finding a center to be a high or low outlier by chance alone using the 90% CI. Inclusion of DOA and DIE patients in risk-adjusted analysis of mortality is appropriate and eliminates the bias introduced by exclusion of ED deaths owing to misuse of the DOA classification. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/epidemiologic study, level III.

Health care reform at trauma centers--mortality, complications, and length of stay.

OBJECTIVE: The Trauma Quality Improvement Program has demonstrated existence of significant variations in risk-adjusted mortality across trauma centers. However, it is unknown whether centers with lower mortality rates also have reduced length of stay (LOS), with associated cost savings. We hypothesized that LOS is not primarily determined by unmodifiable factors, such as age and injury severity, but is primarily dependent on the development of potentially preventable complications. METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank (2002-2006) was used to include patients (older than 16 years) with at least one severe injury (Abbreviated Injury Scale score ≥ 3) from Level I and II trauma centers (217,610 patients, 151 centers). A previously validated risk-adjustment algorithm was used to calculate observed-to-expected mortality ratios for each center. Poisson regression was used to determine the relationship between LOS, observed-to-expected mortality ratios, and complications while controlling for confounding factors, such as age, gender, mechanism, insurance status, comorbidities, and injuries and their severity. RESULTS: Large variations in LOS (median, 4-8 days) were observed across trauma centers. There was no relationship between mortality and LOS. The most important predictor of LOS was complications, which were associated with a 62% increase. Injury severity score, shock, gunshot wounds, brain injuries, intensive care unit admission, and comorbidities were less important predictors of LOS. CONCLUSION: Quality improvement programs focusing on mortality alone may not be associated with reduced LOS. Hence, the Trauma Quality Improvement Program should also focus on processes of care that reduce complications, thereby shortening LOS, which may lead to significant cost savings at trauma centers.

Multidisciplinary trauma intensive care unit checklist: impact on infection rates.

UNLABELLED: The purpose of this study was to implement a multidisciplinary daily quality checklist in a trauma intensive care setting to determine adherence to infection prevention protocols as well as the impact on infection and complications. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team developed a checklist incorporating evidence-based practice guidelines for the prevention of hospital-acquired infections. Infection rates were monitored and correlated with checklist completion. RESULTS: Central line, urinary tract infections, and ventilator-associated pneumonia decreased during the study period by 100%, 26%, and 82%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Initiation of a multidisciplinary daily quality checklist is correlated with decreased infection rates in a trauma intensive care setting.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services quality indicators do not correlate with risk-adjusted mortality at trauma centers.

OBJECTIVES: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) publicly reports hospital compliance with evidence-based processes of care as quality indicators. We hypothesized that compliance with CMS quality indicators would correlate with risk-adjusted mortality rates in trauma patients. METHODS: A previously validated risk-adjustment algorithm was used to measure observed-to-expected mortality ratios (O/E with 95% confidence interval) for Level I and II trauma centers using the National Trauma Data Bank data. Adult patients (>or=16 years) with at least one severe injury (Abbreviated Injury Score >or=3) were included (127,819 patients). Compliance with CMS quality indicators in four domains was obtained from Hospital Compare website: acute myocardial infarction (8 processes), congestive heart failure (4 processes), pneumonia (7 processes), surgical infections (3 processes). For each domain, a single composite score was calculated for each hospital. The relationship between O/E ratios and CMS quality indicators was explored using nonparametric tests. RESULTS: There was no relationship between compliance with CMS quality indicators and risk-adjusted outcomes of trauma patients. CONCLUSIONS: CMS quality indicators do not correlate with risk-adjusted mortality rates in trauma patients. Hence, there is a need to develop new trauma-specific process of care quality indicators to evaluate and improve quality of care in trauma centers.

Quality of Care Within a Trauma Center Is not Altered by Injury Type.

BACKGROUND: : Previous studies have demonstrated variations in severity-adjusted mortality between trauma centers. However, it is not clear if outcomes vary by the type of injury being treated. METHODS: : National Trauma Data Bank was used to identify patients 16 years or older with moderate to severe injuries (Abbreviated Injury score > or =3) treated at level I or II trauma centers (n = 127,439 patients, 105 centers). Observed-to-Expected mortality ratios (O/E ratios, 95% confidence interval [CI]) were calculated for each trauma center within each of the three injury types: blunt multisystem (two or more body regions; n = 27,980; crude mortality, 15%), penetrating torso (neck, chest, or abdomen; n = 9,486; crude mortality, 9%), and blunt single system (n = 89,973; crude mortality 5%). Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for age, gender, mechanism, transfer status, and injury severity (Glasgow Coma Scale, blood pressure). For each injury type, trauma centers' performance was ranked as high (O/E with 95% CI <1), low (O/E with 95% CI >1), or average performers (O/E overlapping 1). RESULTS: : Almost three quarters of the trauma centers achieved the same performance rank in each of the three injury categories. There were 14 low-performing trauma centers in blunt multisystem injuries, six in penetrating torso injuries, and nine in the blunt single system injuries group. None of these centers achieved high performance in any other type of injury. CONCLUSIONS: : Risk-adjusted outcomes are consistent within trauma centers across different types of injuries, suggesting that quality improvement efforts should measure, analyze, and focus on hospital-wide systems of care, rather than on isolated quality domains related to specific types of injury.

The Trauma Quality Improvement Program: pilot study and initial demonstration of feasibility.

OBJECTIVE: The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma has created a "Trauma Quality Improvement Program" (TQIP) that uses the existing infrastructure of Committee on Trauma programs. As the first step toward full implementation of TQIP, a pilot study was conducted in 23 American College of Surgeons verified or state designated Level I and II trauma centers. This study details the feasibility and acceptance of TQIP among the participating centers. METHODS: Data from the National Trauma Data Bank for patients admitted to pilot study hospitals during 2007 were used (15,801 patients). A multivariable logistic regression model was developed to estimate risk-adjusted mortality in aggregate and on three prespecified subgroups (1: blunt multisystem, 2: penetrating truncal, and 3: blunt single-system injury). Benchmark reports were developed with each center's risk adjusted mortality (expressed as an observed-to-expected [O/E] mortality ratio and 90% confidence interval [CI]) and crude complication rates available for comparison. Reports were deidentified with only the recipient having access to their performance relative to their peers. Feedback from individual centers regarding the utility of the reports was collected by survey. RESULTS: Overall crude mortality was 7.7% and in cohorts 1 to 3 was 16.4%, 12.4%, and 5.1%, respectively. In the aggregate risk-adjusted analysis, three trauma centers were low outliers (O/E and 90% CI <1) and two centers were high outliers (O/E and 90% CI >1) with the remaining 18 centers demonstrating average mortality. Challenges identified were in benchmarking mortality after penetrating injury due to small sample size and in the limited capture of complications. Ninety-two percent of survey respondents found the report clear and understandable, and 90% thought that the report was useful. Sixty-three percent of respondents will be taking action based on the report. CONCLUSIONS: Using the National Trauma Data Bank infrastructure to provide risk-adjusted benchmarking of trauma center mortality is feasible and perceived as useful. There are differences in O/E ratios across similarly verified or designated centers. Substantial work is required to allow for morbidity benchmarking.