Incidence of surgical rib fixation at chest wall injury society collaborative centers and a guide for expected number of cases (CWIS-CC1).

PURPOSE: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) improves outcomes in certain patient populations. The Chest Wall Injury Society (CWIS) began a new initiative to recognize centers who epitomize their mission as CWIS Collaborative Centers (CWIS-CC). We sought to describe incidence and epidemiology of SSRF at our institutions. METHODS: A retrospective registry evaluation of all patients (age > 15 years) treated at international trauma centers from 1/1/20 to 7/30/2021 was performed. Variables included: age, gender, mechanism of injury, injury severity score, abbreviated injury severity score (AIS), emergency department disposition, length of stay, presence of rib/sternal fractures, and surgical stabilization of rib/sternal fractures. Classification and regression tree analysis (CART) was used for analysis. RESULTS: Data were collected from 9 centers, 26,084 patient encounters. Rib fractures were present in 24% (n = 6294). Overall, 2% of all patients underwent SSRF and 8% of patients with rib fractures underwent SSRF. CART analysis of SSRF by AIS-Chest demonstrated a difference in management by age group. AIS-Chest 3 had an SSRF rate of 3.7, 7.3, and 12.9% based on the age ranges (16-19; 80-110), (20-49; 70-79), and (50-69), respectively (p = 0.003). AIS-Chest > 3 demonstrated an SSRF rate of 9.6, 23.3, and 39.3% for age ranges (16-39; 90-99), (40-49; 80-89), and (50-79), respectively (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Anticipated rate of SSRF can be calculated based on number of rib fractures, AIS-Chest, and age. The disproportionate rate of SSRF in patients age 50-69 with AIS-Chest 3 and age 50-79 with AIS-Chest > 3 should be further investigated, as lower frequency of SSRF in the other age ranges may lead to care inequalities.

Trauma advanced practice provider programme development in an academic setting to optimize care coordination.

BACKGROUND: Benchmark data from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) identified an opportunity for improvement in our trauma programme. Our unexpected return to the intensive care unit (ICU) was found to be higher than the national averages and we also noticed that our readmission rate had increased. We chose to address these complications as continuous quality improvement projects. It was hypothesized that restructuring the workflow of the trauma advanced practice providers (APPs) to focus on the delivery of comprehensive clinical care would decrease return to ICU and readmission rates of trauma patients. METHODS: The development of the APP programme occurred from 2012 to 2014. First, APP daily shifts were extended to mirror the resident physicians' coverage. Second, the APPs' original job description was expanded from 'task-oriented' workflow to providing comprehensive clinical care. Third, the APPs were involved in the evaluation and decision-making process for transferring trauma patients from the ICU. Finally, the APPs implemented a new discharge process that included all information in a standardized format and a follow-up phone call 24-48 hours after discharge. The trauma registry at our verified, academic level I trauma center was use to assess our ICU and hospital readmission rates during the time we instituted the new APP workflow programme. RESULTS: In 2012, our ICU readmission rate was 5.7% (TQIP=1.9%) but then decreased to 4.4% in 2013 (TQIP=2.5%) and 2.1% in 2014 (TQIP=2.8%). Our hospital readmission rate was 2.0% in 2012 but then decreased to 1.38% and 0.96% over the next 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: After extending the APP service coverage, implementing a comprehensive clinical care model and standardizing the discharge process, our unplanned return to ICU rates have decreased to below the TQIP national average and hospital readmission rates have also decreased by half. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.