Defining a Research Agenda for Layperson Prehospital Hemorrhage Control: A Consensus Statement.

Importance: Trauma is the leading cause of death for US individuals younger than 45 years, and uncontrolled hemorrhage is a major cause of trauma mortality. The US military's medical advancements in the field of prehospital hemorrhage control have reduced battlefield mortality by 44%. However, despite support from many national health care organizations, no integrated approach to research has been made regarding implementation, epidemiology, education, and logistics of prehospital hemorrhage control by layperson immediate responders in the civilian sector. Objective: To create a national research agenda to help guide future work for prehospital hemorrhage control by laypersons. Evidence Review: The 2-day, in-person, National Stop the Bleed (STB) Research Consensus Conference was conducted on February 27 to 28, 2019, to identify and achieve consensus on research gaps. Participants included (1) subject matter experts, (2) professional society-designated leaders, (3) representatives from the federal government, and (4) representatives from private foundations. Before the conference, participants were provided a scoping review on layperson prehospital hemorrhage control. A 3-round modified Delphi consensus process was conducted to determine high-priority research questions. The top items, with median rating of 8 or more on a Likert scale of 1 to 9 points, were identified and became part of the national STB research agenda. Findings: Forty-five participants attended the conference. In round 1, participants submitted 487 research questions. After deduplication and sorting, 162 questions remained across 5 a priori-defined themes. Two subsequent rounds of rating generated consensus on 113 high-priority, 27 uncertain-priority, and 22 low-priority questions. The final prioritized research agenda included the top 24 questions, including 8 for epidemiology and effectiveness, 4 for materials, 9 for education, 2 for global health, and 1 for health policy. Conclusions and Relevance: The National STB Research Consensus Conference identified and prioritized a national research agenda to support laypersons in reducing preventable deaths due to life-threatening hemorrhage. Investigators and funding agencies can use this agenda to guide their future work and funding priorities.

Civilian Prehospital Tourniquet Use Is Associated with Improved Survival in Patients with Peripheral Vascular Injury.

BACKGROUND: Tourniquet use has been proven to reduce mortality on the battlefield. Although empirically transitioned to the civilian environment, data substantiating survival benefit attributable to civilian tourniquet use is lacking. We hypothesized that civilian prehospital tourniquet use is associated with reduced mortality in patients with peripheral vascular injuries. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a multicenter retrospective review of all patients sustaining peripheral vascular injuries admitted to 11 Level I trauma centers (January 2011 through December 2016). The study population was divided into 2 groups based on prehospital tourniquet use. Baseline characteristics were compared and factors associated with mortality identified. Logistic regression, adjusting for demographic, physiologic and injury-related parameters, was used to evaluate the association between prehospital tourniquet use and mortality. Delayed amputation was the secondary end point. RESULTS: During 6 years, 1,026 patients with peripheral vascular injuries were admitted. Prehospital tourniquets were used in 181 (17.6%) patients. Tourniquet time averaged 77.3 ± 63.3 minutes (interquartile range 39.0 to 92.3 minutes). Traumatic amputations occurred in 98 patients (35.7% had a tourniquet). Mortality was 5.2% in the non-tourniquet group compared with 3.9% in the tourniquet group (odds ratio 1.36; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.65; p = 0.452). After multivariable analysis, the use of tourniquets was found to be independently associated with survival (adjusted odds ratio 5.86; 95% CI 1.41 to 24.47; adjusted p = 0.015). Delayed amputation rates were not significantly different between the 2 groups (1.1% vs 1.1%; adjusted odds ratio 1.82; 95% CI 0.36 to 9.99; adjusted p = 0.473). CONCLUSIONS: Although still underused, civilian prehospital tourniquet application was independently associated with a 6-fold mortality reduction in patients with peripheral vascular injuries. More aggressive prehospital application of extremity tourniquets in civilian trauma patients with extremity hemorrhage and traumatic amputation is warranted.

PTSD in those who care for the injured.

BACKGROUND: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) has become a focus for the care of trauma victims, but the incidence of PTSD in those who care for injured patients has not been well studied. Our hypothesis was that a significant proportion of health care providers involved with trauma care are at risk of developing PTSD. METHODS: A system-wide survey was applied using a modified version of the Primary Care PTSD Screen [PC-PTSD], a validated PTSD screening tool currently being used by the VA to screen veterans for PTSD. Pre-hospital and in-hospital care providers including paramedics, nurses, trauma surgeons, emergency medicine physicians, and residents were invited to participate in the survey. The survey questionnaire was anonymously and voluntarily performed online using the Qualtrix system. Providers screened positive if they affirmatively answered any three or more of the four screening questions and negative if they answered less than three questions with a positive answer. Respondents were grouped by age, gender, region, and profession. RESULTS: 546 providers answered all of the survey questions. The screening was positive in 180 (33%) and negative in 366 (67%) of the responders. There were no differences observed in screen positivity for gender, region, or age. Pre-hospital providers were significantly more likely to screen positive for PTSD compared to the in-hospital providers (42% vs. 21%, P<0.001). Only 55% of respondents had ever received any information or education about PTSD and only 13% of respondents ever sought treatment for PTSD. CONCLUSION: The results of this survey are alarming, with high proportions of healthcare workers at risk for PTSD across all professional groups. PTSD is a vastly underreported entity in those who care for the injured and could potentially represent a major problem for both pre-hospital and in-hospital providers. A larger, national study is warranted to verify these regional results.