Sledding while towed behind motorized vehicles associates with more severe and lethal injuries☆.

INTRODUCTION: Our institution has recently experienced an increase in sledding-related injuries, particularly when towed behind motorized vehicles. The purpose of this study was to characterize injury severity and clinical outcomes between pediatric patients who sustain injuries owing to motorized sledding accidents to aid in injury prevention messaging. METHODS: This retrospective study queried all patients who presented with a sledding-related injury to a single ACS-verified Level 1 Pediatric Trauma Center located in the Southeastern United States between 01/2015 and 01/2022. Demographics, injury details, and clinical outcomes were compared between two groups: patients towed behind a motorized vehicle (MOTOR) and those who were not (GRAVITY). RESULTS: Of the 67 patients included in our analysis, 15 (22%) were in the MOTOR group. Patients in the MOTOR group presented with significantly higher injury severity (ISS) and lower Glasgow coma scale (GCS) scores. Additionally, patients in this MOTOR group more often received a blood transfusion and intubation, had longer intensive care and overall hospital lengths of stay, and incurred higher hospital costs. In a multivariate analysis, the use of a motorized vehicle to sled was independently associated with increased ISS (OR: 9.7, 95% CI 1.9-17.5; p = 0.02). Two deaths occurred after sledding while being towed behind a motorized vehicle. CONCLUSION: Children experiencing sledding accidents while being towed by motorized vehicles sustain significantly more severe injuries and require more intensive treatments that together lead to increased hospital costs. These findings provide the framework for community educational initiatives and injury prevention measures to mitigate risk among children engaged in sledding. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV retrospective cohort study.

Socioeconomic factors associated with helmet use in pediatric ATV and dirt bike trauma.

Objectives: Recreational off-road vehicle crashes can produce severe injury and death among children, often from head trauma sustained while riding unhelmeted. Although required for competition, recreational riders commonly forego helmets. This study aimed to identify socioeconomic factors associated with unhelmeted injuries among children riding all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and dirt bikes recreationally, thus informing injury prevention efforts. Methods: A retrospective review was completed of patients younger than 18 years who presented after recreational ATV or dirt bike crash to a single American College of Surgeons-verified level 1 pediatric trauma center (2010-2019). Demographic, injury, and outcome data were collected. US Census data regarding median and per capita income, poverty prevalence, and scholastic graduation rates were recorded for each patient's home county. Relationships between helmet use at the time of injury, demographics, and socioeconomic variables were examined. Results: The cohort comprised 680 injured recreational ATV (n=510; 75%) and dirt bike (170; 25%) riders. Unhelmeted riders (n=450) were significantly older (median age 13 vs 11 years; p=0.008) and more often rode ATVs (n=399). Significantly greater percentages of females (77.9%; p<0.001) and passengers (89.5%; p<0.001) were unhelmeted at the time of injury. Residents of counties with lower median and per capita income, higher poverty prevalence, and lower high school and college graduation rates were significantly more likely to be unhelmeted at the time of their crash (p=0.003). In multivariable analysis, unhelmeted injuries were independently associated with ATV use (OR=6.757; p<0.0001), passenger status (OR=6.457; p<0.0001), and older age (OR=1.219; p<0.0001). Conclusion: In children, ATV use, passenger status, and older age associated independently with unhelmeted riding in recreational vehicle crash. Residence in a county with both lower median income and scholastic graduation rates associated with unhelmeted crashes, and lower median income significantly predicted unhelmeted crashes. This study revealed socioeconomic factors that identify communities with greatest need for injury prevention initiatives. Level of evidence: III-retrospective comparative epidemiological study.

Changes in Pediatric Emergency Department Visits During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Community mitigation measures were implemented to decrease the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. In this study, we aimed to evaluate changes in pediatric emergency department (ED) visits, secondary to acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs) and trauma, before and during the pandemic. We hypothesized that the numbers of ED visits and ARIs would decrease, whereas the proportion of trauma visits would increase. METHODS: A retrospective study from 2018 to 2020 was performed on children 18 years and younger presenting to the ED either for ARI or trauma at a high-volume comprehensive pediatric hospital between March and May each year. International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification admission diagnosis codes were used to identify ARI, trauma, and injury mechanisms. Pearson's χ2 test was used to compare proportions between categorical variables. RESULTS: Overall, 6393 total ED visits occurred in 2020, compared with 11 758 and 12 138 in 2018 and 2019, respectively. In 2020, the total ARI number declined by 58%, and ARI frequency decreased significantly, whereas the total trauma number declined by 34%, and the proportion of trauma visits significantly increased. In addition, the number and proportion of recreational vehicle crashes increased, whereas the number and proportion decreased for all intentional and animal-related traumas. CONCLUSIONS: The total number of pediatric ED visits dropped precipitously in 2020, but the proportion of trauma visits increased significantly in 2020, accounting for greater than one-quarter of all ED visits. Injury mechanism varied significantly compared to previous years. Future studies are needed to confirm these findings and evaluate the benefits of community mitigation to decrease ARIs and strategies directed to reduce mechanism-specific trauma.

Therapeutic laparoscopy for pediatric abdominal trauma.

BACKGROUND: For the surgical treatment of traumatic hollow viscus injuries, laparoscopy offers a potentially less morbid approach to open exploration among appropriately selected patients. This study aimed to evaluate utilization trends and efficacy of laparoscopy in the management of pediatric abdominal trauma. STUDY DESIGN: To gain both study granularity and power, our institutional trauma registry (2005-2017) and the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB; 2010-2015) identified patients ≤18 years who required celiotomy for abdominal trauma. Injury mechanisms, patient characteristics, and hospital courses were compared between open and laparoscopic approaches. Unadjusted and adjusted statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Overall, data were similar among 393 institutional and 11,399 NTDB patients undergoing laparoscopic (n = 88, 22%; n = 1663, 16%) or open (n = 305, 78%; n = 9736, 85%) surgery for abdominal trauma. In both registries, laparoscopy was more commonly employed in younger (institutional p = 0.026; NTDB p < 0.001) female (p = 0.019; p < 0.001) patients having lower injury severity (p < 0.001) and blunt injuries (p = 0.031; p < 0.001). Laparoscopy was associated with fewer complications overall when adjusting for demographics and injury severity [institutional OR 0.25 (0.08-0.75), p = 0.013; NTDB OR 0.69 (0.55-0.88), p = 0.002]. An increase in utilization of MIS for pediatric abdominal trauma was detected over time (NTDB: r = 0.88, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: For the management of pediatric abdominal trauma, laparoscopy was employed typically in younger, more stable, and female patients sustaining blunt injuries. Appropriately selected patients have similar or better outcomes to patients treated with laparotomy, with no increase in adverse events or missed injuries. Increased utilization of laparoscopy to manage abdominal trauma in children suggests greater acceptance of this approach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.