Assessing the academic and professional needs of trauma nurse practitioners and physician assistants.

Because of multiple changes in the health care environment, the use of services of physician assistants (PAs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) in trauma and critical care has expanded. Appropriate training and ongoing professional development for these providers are essential to optimize clinical outcomes. This study offers a baseline assessment of the academic and professional needs of the contemporary trauma PAs/NPs in the United States. A 14-question electronic survey, using SurveyMonkey, was distributed to PAs/NPs at trauma centers identified through the American College of Surgeons Web site and other online resources. Demographic questions included trauma center level, provider type, level of education, and professional affiliations. Likert scale questions were incorporated to assess level of mentorship, comfort level with training, and individual perceived needs for academic and professional development. There were 120 survey respondents: 60 NPs and 60 PAs. Sixty-two respondents (52%) worked at level I trauma centers and 95 (79%) were hospital-employed. Nearly half (49%) reported working in trauma centers for 3 years or less. One hundred nineteen respondents (99%) acknowledged the importance of trauma-specific education; 98 (82%) were required by their institution to obtain such training. Thirty-five respondents (32%) reported receiving $1000 per year or less as a continuing medical education benefit. Insufficient mentorship, professional development, and academic development were identified by 22 (18%), 16 (13%), and 30 (25%) respondents, respectively. Opportunities to network with trauma PAs/NPs outside their home institution were identified as insufficient by 79 (66%). While PAs/NPs in trauma centers recognize the importance of continued contemporary trauma care and evidence-based practices, attending trauma-related education is not universally required by their employers. Financial restrictions may pose an additional impediment to academic development. Therefore, resource-efficient opportunities should be a prime consideration for advanced practitioners education, especially since half of the reported workforce has 3 years or less experience. The Eastern Association of Trauma and other organizations can provide an ideal venue for mentorship, academic development, and networking that is vital to PA/NP professional development and, ultimately, quality patient care.

Utilization of PAs and NPs at a level I trauma center: effects on outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study analyzes the impact of midlevel practitioners (MLPs) on patient care and resource utilization at a level I trauma center. METHODS: A retrospective review of trauma patients admitted during two periods was performed: PRE-MLP, during which limited MLP coverage was available; and POST-MLP, when MLP coverage was expanded. Demographics, injury severity scores (ISS), and preexisting medical conditions (PEC) were recorded. Trauma service activity was measured by daily admissions, inpatient census, and daily discharges. Outcome variables included hospital mortality, total length of stay (HLOS), ICU length of stay (ICU-LOS), and incidence of the three most prevalent complications: deep vein thrombosis (DVT), major arrhythmia (MA), urinary tract infection (UTI). RESULTS: PRE-MLP and POST-MLP groups were similar with respect to age, gender, and ISS. Mean daily admissions were 3.05 during the PRE-MLP period and 4.01 during the POST-MLP period (P = .0001). Reduced incidence of UTI was demonstrated in the POST-MLP period: 0.9% versus 2.6% (P = .0001). Incidence of DVT and MA were unchanged. HLOS decreased from 5.09 days to 4.84 days (P = .092). ICU-LOS was reduced from 4.08 days to 3.28 days (P = .019). CONCLUSION: Use of MLPs led to a significant reduction in ICU-LOS with no increased incidence of complications. MLPs offer a clinically effective and resource-efficient alternative to residents on a trauma service.

Emergency Nurse Documentation Improvement Tool.

Nursing documentation for trauma resuscitation has improved significantly at our level I trauma center because of the introduction of our Emergency Nurse Documentation Improvement Tool (END-IT). The END-IT system was implemented as a performance improvement model and utilizes existing computer software. It provides quick computerized feedback to professional nurses when documentation of trauma cases needs further attention. The feedback is provided in written form and uses peer mentoring to improve accountability in documentation. The program has been successful and has decreased documentation omissions and mistakes by 21%.

Early experience with retrievable inferior vena cava filters in high-risk trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: This study describes the use of retrievable IVC filters in a select group of trauma patients at high risk for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). STUDY DESIGN: Retrievable IVC filters were placed in selected trauma patients who met high-risk criteria for deep vein thrombosis and PE according to institutional clinical management guidelines. All filters were placed percutaneously in the interventional radiology suite. Indications for filter placement were based on injury complex, weight-bearing status, and contraindications to enoxaparin or pneumatic compression devices. IVC filters were either removed or maintained. RESULTS: Retrievable IVC filters were placed in 35 patients after blunt trauma. Twenty-six patients (74%) sustained at least one orthopaedic injury; 17 patients (49%) were diagnosed with a pelvis fracture. Activity was limited to bed rest or spinal precautions in 18 patients (51%). Enoxaparin was contraindicated in 32 patients (91%) and injuries precluded the use of pneumatic compression devices in 11 (31%). IVC filters were removed in 18 patients (51%), with no reported complications. Patients with orthopaedic injuries and pelvis fractures were less likely to have their filters maintained (p = 0.040). CONCLUSIONS: Retrievable IVC filters offer a versatile option for prophylaxis in trauma patients at high risk for PE. Filter retrieval potentially spares the longterm complications of permanent filters in younger trauma patients. Retrievable filters warrant consideration in patients who meet high-risk criteria for deep vein thrombosis or PE who cannot receive effective mechanical prophylaxis and in whom contraindications to anticoagulation are expected to be temporary.