The value of pre-hospital trauma life support courses for medical personnel-a questionnaire study.

Background: The aim of the study was to determine the impact that PHTLS® course participation had on self-confidence of emergency personnel, regarding the pre-hospital treatment of patients who had suffered severe trauma. Furthermore, the goal was to determine the impact of specific medical profession, work experience and prior course participation had on the benefits of PHTLS® training. Methods: A structured questionnaire study was performed. Healthcare providers from local emergency services involved in pre-hospital care in the metropolitan area of Zurich (Switzerland, Europe) who completed a PHTLS® course were included. Altered self-confidence, communication, and routines in the treatment of severe trauma patients were examined. The impact of prior course participation, work experience and profession on course benefits were evaluated. Results: The response rate was 76%. A total of 6 transport paramedics (TPs), 66 emergency paramedics (EPs) and 15 emergency doctors (EDs) were included. Emergency paramedics had significantly more work experience compared with EDs (respectively 7.1 ± 5.7 yrs. vs. 4.5 ± 2.1 yrs., p = 0.004). 86% of the participants reported increased self-confidence in the pre-hospital management of severe trauma upon PHTLS® training completion. Moreover, according to 84% of respondents, extramural treatment of trauma changed upon course completion. PHTLS® course participants had improved communication in 93% of cases. This was significantly more frequent in EPs than TPs (p = 0.03). Multivariable analysis revealed emergency paramedics benefit the most from PHTLS® course participation. Conclusion: The current study shows that PHTLS® training is associated with improved self-confidence and enhanced communication, with regards to treatment of severe trauma patients in a pre-hospital setting, among medical emergency personnel. Additionally, emergency paramedics who took the PHTLS® course improved in overall self-confidence. These findings imply that all medical personal involved in the pre-hospital care of trauma patients, in a metropolitan area in Europe, do benefit from PHTLS® training. This was independent of the profession, previous working experience or prior alternative course participation.

Evaluation of Prehospital Undertriage in Relation to Trauma Team Activation-Results from a Prospective Study in 12 Level one German Trauma Centers.

Background/Objective: This prospective, multicenter observational cohort study was carried out in 12 trauma centers in Germany and Switzerland. Its purpose was to evaluate the rate of undertriage, as well as potential consequences, and relate these with different Trauma Team Activation Protocols (TTA-Protocols), as this has not been done before in Germany. Methods: Each trauma center collected the data during a three-month period between December 2019 and February 2021. All 12 participating hospitals are certified as supra-regional trauma centers. Here, we report a subgroup analysis of undertriaged patients. Those included in the study were all consecutive adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with acute trauma admitted to the emergency department of one of the participating hospitals by the prehospital emergency medical service (EMS) within 6 h after trauma. The data contained information on age, sex, trauma mechanism, pre- and in-hospital physiology, emergency interventions, emergency surgical interventions, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and death within 48 h. Trauma team activation (TTA) was initiated by the emergency medical services. This should follow the national guidelines for severe trauma using established field triage criteria. We used various denominators, such as ISS, and criteria for the appropriateness of TTA to evaluate the undertriage in four groups. Results: This study included a total of 3754 patients. The average injury severity score was 5.1 points, and 7.0% of cases (n = 261) presented with an injury severity score (ISS) of 16+. TTA was initiated for a total of 974 (26%) patients. In group 1, we evaluated how successful the actual practice in the EMS was in identifying patients with ISS 16+. The undertriage rate was 15.3%, but mortality was lower in the undertriage cohort compared to those with a TTA (5% vs. 10%). In group 2, we evaluated the actual practice of EMS in terms of identifying patients meeting the appropriateness of TTA criteria; this showed a higher undertriage rate of 35.9%, but as seen in group 1, the mortality was lower (5.9% vs. 3.3%). In group 3, we showed that, if the EMS were to strictly follow guideline criteria, the rate of undertriage would be even higher (26.2%) regarding ISS 16+. Using the appropriateness of TTA criteria to define the gold standard for TTA (group 4), 764 cases (20.4%) fulfilled at least one condition for retrospective definition of TTA requirement. Conclusions: Regarding ISS 16+, the rate of undertriage in actual practice was 15.3%, but those patients did not have a higher mortality.

Timing of Spinal Surgery in Polytrauma: The Relevance of Injury Severity, Injury Level and Associated Injuries.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective database analysis. OBJECTIVE: Polytraumatized patients with spinal injuries require tailor-made treatment plans. Severity of both spinal and concomitant injuries determine timing of spinal surgery. Aim of this study was to evaluate the role of spinal injury localization, severity and concurrent injury patterns on timing of surgery and subsequent outcome. METHODS: The TraumaRegister DGU® was utilized and patients, aged ≥16 years, with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥16 and diagnosed with relevant spinal injuries (abbreviated injury scale, AIS ≥ 3) were selected. Concurrent spinal and non-spinal injuries were analysed and the relation between injury severity, concurrent injury patterns and timing of spinal surgery was determined. RESULTS: 12.596 patients with a mean age of 50.8 years were included. 7.2% of patients had relevant multisegmental spinal injuries. Furthermore, 50% of patients with spine injuries AIS ≥3 had a more severe non-spinal injury to another body part. ICU and hospital stay were superior in patients treated within 48 hrs for lumbar and thoracic spinal injuries. In cervical injuries early intervention (<48 hrs) was associated with increased mortality rates (9.7 vs 6.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The current multicentre study demonstrates that polytrauma patients frequently sustain multiple spinal injuries, and those with an index spine injury may therefore benefit from standardized whole-spine imaging. Moreover, timing of surgical spinal surgery and outcome appear to depend on the severity of concomitant injuries and spinal injury localization. Future prospective studies are needed to identify trauma characteristics that are associated with improved outcome upon early or late spinal surgery.

Implementation of a novel nursing assessment tool in geriatric trauma patients with proximal femur fractures.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric trauma patients represent a special challenge in postoperative care and are prone to specific complications. The goal of this study was to analyse the predictive potential of a novel nursing assessment tool, the outcome-oriented nursing assessment for acute care (ePA-AC), in geriatric trauma patients with proximal femur fractures (PFF). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of geriatric trauma patients aged ≥ 70 years with PFF was conducted at a level 1 trauma centre. The ePA-AC is a routinely used tool that evaluates pneumonia; confusion, delirium and dementia (CDD); decubitus (Braden Score); the risk of falls; the Fried Frailty index (FFI); and nutrition. Assessment of the novel tool included analysis of its ability to predict complications including delirium, pneumonia and decubitus. RESULTS: The novel ePA-AC tool was investigated in 71 geriatric trauma patients. In total, 49 patients (67.7%) developed at least one complication. The most common complication was delirium (n = 22, 44.9%). The group with complications (Group C) had a significantly higher FFI compared with the group without complications (Group NC) (1.7 ± 0.5 vs 1.2 ± 0.4, p = 0.002). Group C had a significantly higher risk score for malnutrition compared with Group NC (6.3 ± 3.4 vs 3.9 ± 2.8, p = 0.004). A higher FFI score increased the risk of developing complications (odds ratio [OR] 9.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.0 to 47.7, p = 0.005). A higher CDD score increased the risk of developing delirium (OR 9.3, 95% CI 2.9 to 29.4, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The FFI, CDD, and nutritional assessment tools are associated with the development of complications in geriatric trauma patients with PFF. These tools can support the identification of geriatric patients at risk and might guide individualised treatment strategies and preventive measures.

Pre-hospital and Hospital Trauma Care during the Covid-19 Lockdown - Experience in a Metropolitan European Level 1 Trauma Centre.

BACKGROUND: Trauma case load is said to have declined during the Covid-19 pandemic, especially during the national lockdowns. Due to the altered frequency and changes in daily life, pre-hospital care (altered personal protective measurements) as well as mechanisms of trauma and initial trauma treatment may have changed. The purpose of this study was to assess differences in pre-hospital as well as initial treatment of trauma victims and trauma mechanisms during a national lockdown compared to the year before. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Pre-hospital as well as clinical data from all trauma patients admitted to our metropolitan level 1 trauma center resuscitation room during the hard lockdown in Switzerland (March 17 to April 26, 2020) and the same time period in 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: In total, we assessed 91 patients (51 lockdown cohort, 40 control cohort) with a mean age of 50.7 years. Significantly more trauma was sustained in the household environment during the lockdown (p = 0.015). Pre-hospital treatment remained similar between the two assessed groups. No difference was found in length of stay or mortality. In severely injured patients (ISS > 15), we found significantly fewer motor vehicle accidents (p = 0.018) and fewer horizontal decelerations (p = 0.006), but insignificantly more falls (p = 0.092) in the lockdown cohort. None of the patients in the lockdown cohort had a positive PCR test for Covid-19 on admission. CONCLUSION: Trauma systems seem not to have changed during hard lockdowns in terms of pre-hospital treatment. Fewer severely injured patients due to motor vehicle accidents and horizontal decelerations, but more household-related injuries were seen in the lockdown cohort than in the control cohort. A qualitative analysis of treatment during the hard lockdown is needed to gain further insights into the effect of the pandemic on trauma care.

The number of beds occupied is an independent risk factor for discharge of trauma patients.

Reducing the burden of limited capacity on medical practitioners and public health systems requires a time-dependent characterization of hospitalization rates, such that inferences can be drawn about the underlying causes for hospitalization and patient discharge. The aim of this study was to analyze non-medical risk factors that lead to the discharge of trauma patients. This retrospective cohort study includes trauma patients who were treated in Switzerland between 2011 and 2018. The national Swiss database for quality assurance in surgery (AQC) was reviewed for trauma diagnoses according to the ICD-10 code. Non-medical risk factors include seasonal changes, daily changes, holidays, and number of beds occupied by trauma patients across Switzerland. Individual patient information was aggregated into counts per day of total patients, as well as counts per day of levels of each categorical variable of interest. The ARIMA-modeling was utilized to model the number of discharges per day as a function of auto aggressive function of all previously mentioned risk factors. This study includes 226,708 patients, 118,059 male (age 48.18, standard deviation (SD) 22.34 years) and 108,649 female (age 62.57, SD 22.89 years) trauma patients. The mean length of stay was 7.16 (SD 14.84) days and most patients were discharged home (n = 168,582, 74.8%). A weekly and yearly seasonality trend can be observed in admission trends. The mean number of occupied trauma beds ranges from 3700 to 4000 per day. The number of occupied beds increases on weekdays and decreases on holidays. The number of occupied beds is a positive, independent risk factor for discharge in trauma patients; as the number of occupied beds increases at any given time, so does the risk for discharge. The number of beds occupied represents an independent non-medical risk factor for discharge. Capacity determines triage of hospitalized patients and therefore might increase the risk of premature discharge.

Discrimination and calibration of a prediction model for mortality is decreased in secondary transferred patients: a validation in the TraumaRegister DGU.

INTRODUCTION: The Revised Injury Severity Classification II (RISC II) score represents a data-derived score that aims to predict mortality in severely injured patients. The aim of this study was to assess the discrimination and calibration of RISC II in secondary transferred polytrauma patients. METHODS: This study was performed on the multicentre database of the TraumaRegister DGU. Inclusion criteria included Injury Severity Score (ISS)≥9 points and complete demographic data. Exclusion criteria included patients with 'do not resuscitate' orders or late transfers (>24 hours after initial trauma). Patients were stratified based on way of admission into patients transferred to a European trauma centre after initial treatment in another hospital (group Tr) and primary admitted patients who were not transferred out (group P). The RISC II score was calculated within each group at admission after secondary transfer (group Tr) and at primary admission (group P) and compared with the observed mortality rate. The calibration and discrimination of prediction were analysed. RESULTS: Group P included 116 112 (91%) patients and group Tr included 11 604 (9%) patients. The study population was predominantly male (n=86 280, 70.1%), had a mean age of 53.2 years and a mean ISS of 20.7 points. Patients in group Tr were marginally older (54 years vs 52 years) and a had slightly higher ISS (21.5 points vs 20.1 points). Median time from accident site to hospital admission was 60 min in group P and 241 min (4 hours) in group Tr. Observed and predicted mortality based on RISC II were nearly identical in group P (10.9% and 11.0%, respectively) but predicted mortality was worse (13.4%) than observed mortality (11.1%) in group Tr. CONCLUSION: The way of admission alters the calibration of prediction models for mortality in polytrauma patients. Mortality prediction in secondary transferred polytrauma patients should be calculated separately from primary admitted polytrauma patients.

Incidence, impact and risk factors for multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) in patients with major trauma: a European Multicenter Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: The burden of MDRO in health systems is a global issue, and a growing problem. We conducted a European multicenter cohort study to assess the incidence, impact and risk factors for multidrug-resistant organisms in patients with major trauma. We conducted this study because the predictive factors and effects of MDRO in severely injured patients are not yet described. Our hypothesis is that positive detection of MDRO in severely injured patients is associated with a less favorable outcome. METHODS: Retrospective study of four level-1 trauma centers including all patients after major trauma with an injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 9 admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) between 2013 and 2017. Outcome was measured using the Glasgow outcome scale (GOS). RESULTS: Of 4131 included patients, 95 (2.3%) had a positive screening for MDRO. Risk factors for MDRO were male gender (OR 1.73 [95% CI 1.04-2.89]), ISS (OR 1.01 [95% CI 1.00-1.03]), PRBC's given (OR 1.73 [95% CI 1.09-2.78]), ICU stay > 48 h (OR 4.01 [95% CI 2.06-7.81]) and mechanical ventilation (OR 1.85 [95% CI 1.01-3.38]). A positive MDRO infection correlates with worse outcome. MDRO positive cases GOS: good recovery = 0.6%, moderate disability = 2.1%, severe disability = 5.6%, vegetative state = 5.7% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MDRO in severely injured patients are rare but associated with a worse outcome at hospital discharge. We identified potential risk factors for MDRO in severely injured patients. Based on our results, we recommend a standardized screening procedure for major trauma patients.

Prevalence and outcome of contrast-induced nephropathy in major trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) has been well investigated in patients undergoing coronary angiography, but not in trauma patients. The main aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and to investigate independent risk factors for the development of CIN. METHODS: Between 2008 and 2014, all pre-hospital intubated major trauma patients with documented serum creatinine levels (SCr) undergoing a contrast-enhanced whole-body CT at admission were retrospectively analyzed. CIN was defined as a relative increase in SCr > 25% over the baseline value or an absolute SCr increase of > 44 µmol/l within 72 h. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed to identify significant risk factors. A p value of < 0.01 was considered statistically significant and a p value of 0.01-0.049 suggested evidence. RESULTS: Of 284 analyzed patients, 41 (14%) met the criteria for CIN. There is suggestive evidence that age and lactate level influenced the development of CIN. Six patients (15%) had hemodialysis in the CIN-group and eight (3.3%) in the group without CIN. Complication and mortality rate was higher in patients with CIN (71% vs. 56% and 32% vs. 23%, respectively). CIN was not an independent risk factor for complications or mortality while controlling for age, gender, injury severity score, and lactate level. The length of stay was not affected by CIN. CONCLUSION: CIN occurs frequently in trauma patients, but is not an independent risk factor for complications or mortality. Therefore, contrast enhanced whole-body CT can safely be performed in trauma patients.

Evaluation of a standardized instrument for post hoc analysis of trauma-team-activation-criteria in 75,613 injured patients an analysis of the TraumaRegister DGU®.

INTRODUCTION: To improve the quality of criteria for trauma-team-activation it is necessary to identify patients who benefited from the treatment by a trauma team. Therefore, we evaluated a post hoc criteria catalogue for trauma-team-activation which was developed in a consensus process by an expert group and published recently. The objective was to examine whether the catalogue can identify patients that died after admission to the hospital and therefore can benefit from a specialized trauma team mostly. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The catalogue was applied to the data of 75,613 patients from the TraumaRegister DGU® between the 01/2007 and 12/2016 with a maximum abbreviated injury score (AIS) severity ≥ 2. The endpoint was hospital mortality, which was defined as death before discharge from acute care. RESULTS: The TraumaRegister DGU® dataset contains 18 of the 20 proposed criteria within the catalogue which identified 99.6% of the patients who were admitted to the trauma room following an accident and who died during their hospital stay. Moreover, our analysis showed that at least one criterion was fulfilled in 59,785 cases (79.1%). The average ISS in this group was 21.2 points (SD 9.9). None of the examined criteria applied to 15,828 cases (average ISS 8.6; SD 5). The number of consensus-based criteria correlated with the severity of injury and mortality. Of all deceased patients (8,451), only 31 (0.37%) could not be identified on the basis of the 18 examined criteria. Where only one criterion was fulfilled, mortality was 1.7%; with 2 or more criteria, mortality was at least 4.6%. DISCUSSION: The consensus-based criteria identified nearly all patients who died as a result of their injuries. If only one criterion was fulfilled, mortality was relatively low. However, it increased to almost 5% if two criteria were fulfilled. Further studies are necessary to analyse and examine the relative weighting of the various criteria. Our instrument is capable to identify severely injured patients with increased in-hospital mortality and injury severity. However, a minimum of two criteria needs to be fulfilled. Based on these findings, we conclude that the criteria list is useful for post hoc analysis of the quality of field triage in patients with severe injury.

A retrospective cohort study of 27,049 polytraumatized patients age 60 and above: identifying changes over 16 years.

PURPOSE: The number of severely injured patients exceeding the age of 60 has shown a steep increase within the last decades. These patients present with numerous co-morbidities, polypharmacy, and increased frailty requiring an adjusted treatment approach. In this study, we establish an overview of changes we observed in demographics of older severe trauma patients from 2002 to 2017. METHODS: A descriptive analysis of the data from the TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU) was performed. Patients admitted to a level one trauma center in Germany, Austria and Switzerland between 2002 and 2017, aged 60 years or older and with an injury severity score (ISS) over 15 were included. Patients were stratified into subgroups based on the admission: 2002-2005 (1), 2006-2009 (2), 2010-2013 (3) and 2014-2017 (4). Trauma and patient characteristics, diagnostics, treatment and outcome were compared. RESULTS: In total 27,049 patients with an average age of 73.9 years met the inclusion criteria. The majority were males (64%), and the mean ISS was 27.4. The proportion of patients 60 years or older [(23% (1) to 40% (4)] rose considerably over time. Trauma mechanisms changed over time and more specifically low falls (< 3 m) rose from 17.6% (1) to 40.1% (4). Altered injury patterns were also identified. Length-of-stay decreased from 28.9 (1) to 19.5 days (4) and the length-of-stay on ICU decreased from 17.1 (1) to 12.7 days (4). Mortality decreased from 40.5% (1) to 31.8% (4). CONCLUSION: Length of stay and mortality decreased despite an increase in patient age. We ascribe this observation mainly to increased use of diagnostic tools, improved treatment algorithms, and the implementation of specialized trauma centers for older patients allowing interdisciplinary care.

Trauma Team Activation: Which Surgical Capability Is Immediately Required in Polytrauma? A Retrospective, Monocentric Analysis of Emergency Procedures Performed on 751 Severely Injured Patients.

There has been an ongoing discussion as to which interventions should be carried out by an "organ specialist" (for example, a thoracic or visceral surgeon) or by a trauma surgeon with appropriate general surgical training in polytrauma patients. However, there are only limited data about which exact emergency interventions are immediately carried out. This retrospective data analysis of one Level 1 trauma center includes adult polytrauma patients, as defined according to the Berlin definition. The primary outcome was the four most common emergency surgical interventions (ESI) performed during primary resuscitation. Out of 1116 patients, 751 (67.3%) patients (male gender, 530, 74.3%) met the inclusion criteria. The median age was 39 years (IQR: 25, 58) and the median injury severity score (ISS) was 38 (IQR: 29, 45). In total, 711 (94.7%) patients had at least one ESI. The four most common ESI were the insertion of a chest tube (48%), emergency laparotomy (26.3%), external fixation (23.5%), and the insertion of an intracranial pressure probe (ICP) (19.3%). The initial emergency treatment of polytrauma patients include a limited spectrum of potential life-saving interventions across distinct body regions. Polytrauma care would benefit from the 24/7 availability of a trauma team able to perform basic potentially life-saving surgical interventions, including chest tube insertion, emergency laparotomy, placing external fixators, and ICP insertion.

Interobserver variability of injury severity assessment in polytrauma patients: does the anatomical region play a role?

BACKGROUND: The Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) and Injury Severity Score (ISS) are widely used to assess trauma patients. In this study, the interobserver variability of the injury severity assessment for severely injured patients was analyzed based on different injured anatomical regions, and the various demographic backgrounds of the observers. METHODS: A standardized questionnaire was presented to surgical experts and participants of clinical polytrauma courses. It contained medical information and initial X-rays/CT-scans of 10 cases of severely injured patients. Participants estimated the severity of each injury based on the AIS. Interobserver variability for the AIS, ISS, and New Injury Severity Score (NISS) was calculated by employing the statistical method of Krippendorff's α coefficient. RESULTS: Overall, 54 participants were included. The major contributing medical specialties were orthopedic trauma surgery (N = 36, 67%) and general surgery (N = 13, 24%). The measured interobserver variability in the assessment of the overall injury severity was high (α ISS: 0.33 / α NISS: 0.23). Moreover, there were differences in the interobserver variability of the maximum AIS (MAIS) depending on the anatomical region: αhead and neck: 0.06, αthorax: 0.45, αabdomen: 0.27 and αextremities: 0.55. CONCLUSIONS: Interobserver agreement concerning injury severity assessment appears to be low among clinicians. We also noted marked differences in variability according to injury anatomy. The study shows that the assessment of injury severity is also highly variable between experts in the field. This implies the need for appropriate education to improve the accuracy of trauma evaluation in the respective trauma registries.

The GERtality Score: The Development of a Simple Tool to Help Predict in-Hospital Mortality in Geriatric Trauma Patients.

Feasible and predictive scoring systems for severely injured geriatric patients are lacking. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a scoring system for the prediction of in-hospital mortality in severely injured geriatric trauma patients. The TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU) was utilized. European geriatric patients (≥65 years) admitted between 2008 and 2017 were included. Relevant patient variables were implemented in the GERtality score. By conducting a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, a comparison with the Geriatric Trauma Outcome Score (GTOS) and the Revised Injury Severity Classification II (RISC-II) Score was performed. A total of 58,055 geriatric trauma patients (mean age: 77 years) were included. Univariable analysis led to the following variables: age ≥ 80 years, need for packed red blood cells (PRBC) transfusion prior to intensive care unit (ICU), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥ 3, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) ≤ 13, Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) in any body region ≥ 4. The maximum GERtality score was 5 points. A mortality rate of 72.4% was calculated in patients with the maximum GERtality score. Mortality rates of 65.1 and 47.5% were encountered in patients with GERtality scores of 4 and 3 points, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) of the novel GERtality score was 0.803 (GTOS: 0.784; RISC-II: 0.879). The novel GERtality score is a simple and feasible score that enables an adequate prediction of the probability of mortality in polytraumatized geriatric patients by using only five specific parameters.

Age-Dependent Patient and Trauma Characteristics and Hospital Resource Requirements-Can Improvement Be Made? An Analysis from the German Trauma Registry.

Background and objectives: The burden of geriatric trauma patients continues to rise in Western society. Injury patterns and outcomes differ from those seen in younger adults. Getting a better understanding of these differences helps medical staff to provide a better care for the elderly. The aim of this study was to determine epidemiological differences between geriatric trauma patients and their younger counterparts. To do so, we used data of polytraumatized patients from the TraumaRegister DGU®. Materials and Methods: All adult patients that were admitted between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2017 were included from the TraumaRegister DGU®. Patients aged 55 and above were defined as the elderly patient group. Patients aged 18-54 were included as control group. Patient and trauma characteristics, as well as treatment and outcome were compared between groups. Results: A total of 114,169 severely injured trauma patients were included, of whom 55,404 were considered as elderly patients and 58,765 younger patients were selected for group 2. Older patients were more likely to be admitted to a Level II or III trauma center. Older age was associated with a higher occurrence of low energy trauma and isolated traumatic brain injury. More restricted utilization of CT-imaging at admission was observed in older patients. While the mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) throughout the age groups stayed consistent, mortality rates increased with age: the overall mortality in young trauma patients was 7.0%, and a mortality rate of 40.2% was found in patients >90 years of age. Conclusions: This study shows that geriatric trauma patients are more frequently injured due to low energy trauma, and more often diagnosed with isolated craniocerebral injuries than younger patients. Furthermore, utilization of diagnostic tools as well as outcome differ between both groups. Given the aging society in Western Europe, upcoming studies should focus on the right application of resources and optimizing trauma care for the geriatric trauma patient.

Simultaneous Casualty Admissions-Do they Affect Treatment in the Receiving Trauma Center?

BACKGROUND: Simultaneous trauma admissions expose medical professionals to increased workload. The impact of simultaneous trauma admissions on hospital allocation, therapy, and outcome is currently unclear. We hypothesized that multiple admission-scenarios impact the diagnostic pathway and outcome. METHODS: The TraumaRegister DGU® was utilized. Patients admitted between 2002-2015 with an ISS ≥ 9, treated with ATLS®- algorithms were included. Group ´IND´ included individual admissions, two individuals that were admitted within 60 min of each other were selected for group ´MULT´. Patients admitted within 10 min were considered as simultaneous (´SIM´) admissions. We compared patient and trauma characteristics, treatment, and outcomes between both groups. RESULTS: 132,382 admissions were included, and 4,462/3.4% MULTiple admissions were found. The SIM-group contained 1,686/1.3% patients. The overall median injury severity score was 17 and a mean age of 48 years was found. MULT patients were more frequently admitted to level-one trauma centers (68%) than individual trauma admissions were (58%, p < 0.001). Mean time to CT-scanning (24 vs. 26/28 min) was longer in MULT / SIM patients compared to individual admissions. No differences in utilization of damage control principles were seen. Moreover, mortality rates did not differ between the groups (13.1% in regular admissions and 11.4%/10,6% in MULT/SIM patients). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that simultaneous treatment of injured patients is rare. Individuals treated in parallel with other patients were more often admitted to level-one trauma centers compared with individual patients. Although diagnostics take longer, treatment principles and mortality are equal in individual admissions and simultaneously admitted patients. More studies are required to optimize health care under these conditions.

Curiosity or Underdiagnosed? Injuries to Thoracolumbar Spine with Concomitant Trauma to Pancreas.

The pancreas is at risk of damage as a consequence of thoracolumbar spine injury. However, there are no studies providing prevalence data to support this assumption. Data from European hospitals documented in the TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU) between 2008-2017 were analyzed to estimate the prevalence of this correlation and to determine the impact on clinical outcome. A total of 44,279 patients with significant thoracolumbar trauma, defined on Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) as ≥2, were included. Patients transferred to another hospital within 48 h were excluded to prevent double counting. A total of 135,567 patients without thoracolumbar injuries (AIS ≤ 1) were used as control group. Four-hundred patients with thoracolumbar trauma had a pancreatic injury. Pancreatic injuries were more common after thoracolumbar trauma (0.90% versus (vs.) 0.51%, odds ratio (OR) 1.78; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 1.57-2.01). Patients with pancreatic injuries were more likely to be male (68%) and had a higher mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) than those without (35.7 ± 16.0 vs. 23.8 ± 12.4). Mean length of stay (LOS) in intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital was longer with pancreatic injury. In-hospital mortality was 17.5% with and 9.7% without pancreatic injury, respectively. Although uncommon, concurrent pancreatic injury in the setting of thoracolumbar trauma can portend a much more serious injury.

The effect of geriatric comanagement (GC) in geriatric trauma patients treated in a level 1 trauma setting: A comparison of data before and after the implementation of a certified geriatric trauma center.

INTRODUCTION: Improvements in life expectancy imply that an increase of geriatric trauma patients occurs. These patients require special attention due to their multiple comorbidity issues. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the implementation of geriatric comanagement (GC) on the allocation and clinical outcome of geriatric trauma patients. METHODS: This observational cohort study aims to compare the demographic development and the clinical outcome in geriatric trauma patients (aged 70 years and older) before and after implementation of a certified geriatric trauma center (GC). Geriatric trauma patients admitted between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2010 were stratified to group pre-GC and admissions between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018 to Group post-GC. We excluded patients requiring end-of-life treatment and those who died within 24 h or due to severe traumatic brain injury. Outcome parameters included demographic changes, medical complexity (measured by American Society of Anaesthesiology Score (ASA) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI)), in-hospital mortality and length of hospitalization. RESULTS: This study includes 626 patients in Group pre-GC (mean age 80.3 ± 6.7 years) and 841 patients in Group post-GC (mean age 81.1 ± 7.3 years). Group pre-GC included 244 (39.0%) males, group post-GC included 361 (42.9%) males. The mean CCI was 4.7 (± 1.8) points in pre-GC and 5.1 (± 2.0) points in post-GC (p <0.001). In Group pre-GC, 100 patients (16.0%) were stratified as ASA 1 compared with 47 patients (5.6%) in Group post-GC (p <0.001). Group pre-GC had significantly less patients stratified as ASA 3 or higher (n = 235, 37.5%) compared with Group post-GC (n = 389, 46.3%, p <0.001). Length of stay (LOS) decreased significantly from 10.4 (± 20.3) days in Group pre-GC to 7.9 (±22.9) days in Group post-GC (p = 0.011). The 30-day mortality rate was comparable amongst these groups (pre-GC 8.8% vs. post-GC 8.9%). CONCLUSION: This study appears to support the implementation of a geriatric trauma center, as certain improvements in the patient care were found: Despite a higher CCI and a higher number of patients with higher ASA classifications, Hospital LOS, complication rates and mortality did were not increased after implementation of the CG. The increase in the case numbers supports the fact that a higher degree of specialization leads to a response by admitting physicians, as it exceeded the expectable trend of demographic ageing. We feel that a larger data base, hopefully in a multi center set up should be undertaken to verify these results.

Pre-hospital trauma care in Switzerland and Germany: do they speak the same language?

PURPOSE: Swiss and German (pre-)hospital systems, distribution and organization of trauma centres differ from each other. It is unclear if outcome in trauma patients differs as well. Therefore, this study aims to determine differences in characteristics, therapy and outcome of trauma patients between both German-speaking countries. METHODS: The TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU) was used. Patients with Injury Severity Score ≥ 9 admitted to a level 1 trauma centre between 01/2009 and 12/2017 were included if they required ICU care or died. Trauma pattern, pre-hospital procedures and outcome were compared between Swiss (CH, n = 4768) and German (DE, n = 66,908) groups. RESULTS: Swiss patients were older than German patients (53 vs. 50 years). ISS did not differ between groups (CH 23.8 vs. DE 23.0 points). There were more low falls < 3 m (34% vs. 21%) at the expense of less traffic accidents (37% vs. 52%) in the Swiss population. In Switzerland 30% of allocations were done without physician involvement, whereas this occurred in 4% of German cases. Despite a comparable number of patients with a GCS ≤ 8 (CH 29.6%; DE 26.4%), differences in pre-hospital intubation rates occurred (CH 31% vs. DE 40%). Severe traumatic brain injuries were diagnosed most frequently in Switzerland (CH 62% vs. DE 49%). Admission vital signs were similar, and standardized mortality ratios were close to one in both countries. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that patients' age, trauma patterns and pre-hospital care differ between Germany and Switzerland. However, adjusted mortality was almost similar. Further benchmarking studies are indicated to optimize trauma care in both German-speaking countries.

Survey on worldwide trauma team activation requirement.

PURPOSE: Trauma team activation (TTA) is thought to be essential for advanced and specialized care of very severely injured patients. However, non-specific TTA criteria may result in overtriage that consumes valuable resources or endanger patients in need of TTA secondary to undertriage. Consequently, criterion standard definitions to calculate the accuracy of the various TTA protocols are required for research and quality assurance purposes. Recently, several groups suggested a list of conditions when a trauma team is considered to be essential in the initial care in the emergency room. The objective of the survey was to post hoc identify trauma-related conditions that are thought to require a specialized trauma team that may be widely accepted, independent from the country's income level. METHODS: A set of questions was developed, centered around the level of agreement with the proposed post hoc criteria to define adequate trauma team activation. The participants gave feedback before they answered the survey to improve the quality of the questions. The finalized survey was conducted using an online tool and a word form. The income per capita of a country was rated according to the World Bank Country and Lending groups. RESULTS: The return rate was 76% with a total of 37 countries participating. The agreement with the proposed criteria to define post hoc correct requirements for trauma team activation was more than 75% for 12 of the 20 criteria. The rate of disagreement was low and varied between zero and 13%. The level of agreement was independent from the country's level of income. CONCLUSIONS: The agreement on criteria to post hoc define correct requirements for trauma team activation appears high and it may be concluded that the proposed criteria could be useful for most countries, independent from their level of income. Nevertheless, more discussions on an international level appear to be warranted to achieve a full consensus to define a universal set of criteria that will allow for quality assessment of over- and undertriage of trauma team activation as well as for the validation of field triage criteria for the most severely injured patients worldwide.