Implementation of health-related quality of life in the German TraumaRegister DGU® - first results of a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 30,000 people are affected by severe injuries in Germany each year. Continuous progress in prehospital and hospital care has significantly reduced the mortality of polytrauma patients. With increasing survival rates, the functional outcome, health-related quality (hrQoL) of life and ability to work are now gaining importance. Aim of the study is, the presentation of the response behavior of seriously injured patients on the one hand and the examination of the factors influencing the quality of life and ability to work 12 months after major trauma on the other hand. Building on these initial results, a standard outcome tool shall be integrated in the established TraumaRegister DGU® in the future. METHODS: In 2018, patients [Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 16; age:18-75 years] underwent multicenter one-year posttraumatic follow-up in six study hospitals. In addition to assessing hrQoL by using the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), five additional questions (treatment satisfaction; ability to work; trauma-related medical treatment; relevant physical disability, hrQoL as compared with the prior to injury status) were applied. RESULTS: Of the 1,162 patients contacted, 594 responded and were included in the analysis. The post-injury hrQoL does not show statistically significant differences between the sexes. Regarding age, however, the younger the patient at injury, the better the SF-12 physical sum score. Furthermore, the physically perceived quality of life decreases statistically significantly in relation to the severity of the trauma as measured by the ISS, whereas the mentally perceived quality of life shows no differences in terms of injury severity. A large proportion of severely injured patients were very satisfied (42.2%) or satisfied (39.9%) with the treatment outcome. It should be emphasized that patients with a high injury severity (ISS > 50) were on average more often very satisfied with the treatment outcome (46.7%). A total of 429 patients provided information on their ability to work 12 months post-injury. Here, 194 (45.2%) patients had a full employment, and 58 (13.5%) patients were had a restricted employment. CONCLUSION: The present results show the importance of a structured assessment of the postinjury hrQoL and the ability to work after polytrauma. Further studies on the detection of influenceable risk factors on hrQoL and ability to work in the intersectoral course of treatment should follow to enable the best possible outcome of polytrauma survivors.

Possible effect of the early administration of tranexamic acid on myocardial injury in patients with severe trauma.

Hemodynamic stabilization plays a crucial role in the treatment of patients suffering from severe trauma. Current guidelines recommend the early administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) for bleeding control. While less blood loss can result in less end-organ damage, including myocardial injury, TXA also exhibits prothrombotic effects with potentially adverse myocardial effects. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between the administration of TXA and myocardial injury in patients with severe trauma. We conducted a monocentric cohort study including severely injured patients ≥ 18 years [defined by Injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 16], who were admitted to a tertiary care hospital between 2016 and 2019. Primary outcome measure was myocardial injury according to the fourth Universal Definition (= high sensitive troponin T ≥ 14 ng/l). Secondary endpoints were in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and mortality. Main exposure was defined as administration of TXA during prehospital period. We conducted multivariate logistic regression models including predefined covariables. A total of 368 patients were screened. Among the 297 included patients (72% male, age. 55?21 years), 119 (40%) presented myocardial injury at hospital arrival. TXA was administered to 20/297 (7%) patients in the prehospital setting, and in 96/297 (32%) patients during pre-or in-hospital period. MACE incidence was 9% (26/297) and in-hospital mortality was 26% (76/297). The adjusted odds ratios (OR) for prehospital TXA and myocardial injury, MACE and mortality were 0.75 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25-2.23], 0.51 [95%CI: 0.06-4.30] and 0.84 [0.21-3.33], respectively. In the present cohort of patients suffering from severe trauma, prehospital TXA did not affect the incidence of myocardial injury.

[Cause of Death after Severe Trauma: 30 Years Experience from TraumaRegister DGU]. / Woran stirbt der schwerverletzte Patient: eine Analyse aus 30 Jahren TraumaRegister DGU.

Every year, thousands of people in Germany succumb to severe injuries. But what causes the death of these patients? In addition to the trauma, pre-traumatic health status, age, and other influencing factors play a role in the outcome after trauma. This study aims to answer the question of what causes the death of a severely injured patient.For this publication, in addition to previously published results, we examined current data from patients in German hospitals from the years 2015-2022 (8 years) documented in the TraumaRegister DGU®. The feature "Presumed Cause of Death", introduced in 2015, was considered. Patients transferred out early (< 48 h) as well as patients with minor injuries were excluded from this analysis.The number of fatalities decreases over time and does not correspond to a traditionally postulated tri-modal mortality distribution. Instead, over time, the distribution of causes of death shows significant variation. In over half of the cases (54%), traumatic brain injury (TBI) was the presumed cause of death, followed by organ failure (24%) and haemorrhage (9%). TBI dominates, especially in the first week, haemorrhage in the first 24 h, and organ failure as a cause steadily increases over time.In summary, it can be observed that the risk of death due to trauma-related consequences is highest in the first minutes, hours, and days, decreasing steadily over time. Particularly, the extent of injuries, head injuries, and significant blood loss are early risk factors.

[Care for Seriously Injured People in Military Conflicts]. / Schwerstverletztenversorgung in kriegerischen Auseinandersetzungen.

The current war in Ukraine has drawn public attention to the treatment of war injuries. Follow-up treatment in Germany is portrayed the clover leaf of the TraumaNetzwerke DGU, is largely based on the demands of the Federal Ministries for Defence and Health and is intended to enhance resilience in war.The present article presents the special features of the care of severely injured patients during hostilities and should provide insights into the expected results of treatment and the actual procedures. We emphasise the unpredictability of the care of the severely injured during hostilities.On the basis of a search of the literature for the deployment of the German Army in Afghanistan and for the current war in Ukraine, we present the challenges and the typical patterns of injuries. We discuss the factors that can influence the procedures and the quality of the results during hostilities and how these may differ from civil polytrauma care in Germany - which is well established and standardised.Even during deployment of the Federal Army or (as planned) NATO, care of the severely injured is under standardised conditions, as based on the algorithmic ATLS care and which is concentrated on bleeding control. The corresponding equipment and personnel are well established, well prepared and well trained.However, there may be special local conditions or special deployments that make it inevitable that emergency medical care will be more delayed than in the civil system in Germany and can only take place after protracted transport. The objective is always that soldiers in combat should be able to receive medical care that is equivalent to that received by all accident victims in Germany, whatever the time and site of the accident.

Traumatic diaphragmatic rupture: epidemiology, associated injuries, and outcome-an analysis based on the TraumaRegister DGU®.

INTRODUCTION: Traumatic diaphragmatic rupture is a rare injury in the severely injured patient and is most commonly caused by blunt mechanisms. However, penetrating mechanisms can also dominate depending on regional and local factors. Traumatic diaphragmatic rupture is difficult to diagnose and can be missed by primary diagnostic procedures in the resuscitation room. Initially not life-threatening, diaphragmatic ruptures can cause severe sequelae in the patient's long-term course if untreated. The objective of this study was to assess the epidemiology, associated injuries, and outcome of traumatic diaphragmatic ruptures based on a multicenter registry-based analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from all patients enrolled in the TraumaRegister DGU® between 2009 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. That multicenter database collects data on prehospital, intra-hospital emergency, intensive care therapy, and discharge. Included were all patients with a Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (MAIS) score of 3 or above and patients with a MAIS score of 2 who died or were treated in the intensive care unit, for whom standard documentation forms had been completed and who had sustained a diaphragmatic rupture (AIS score of 3 or 4). The data has been analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square test or Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Of the 199,933 patients included in the study population, 687 patients (0.3%) had a diaphragmatic rupture. Of these, 71.9% were male. The mean patient age was 46.1 years. Blunt trauma accounted for 73.5% of the injuries. Primary diagnosis was established in the resuscitation room in 93.1% of the patients. Multislice helical computed tomography (MSCT) was performed in 82.7% of the cases. Rib fractures were detected in 60.7% of the patients with a diaphragmatic injury. Patients with diaphragmatic rupture had a higher mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) than patients without a diaphragmatic injury (32.9 vs. 18.6) and a higher mortality rate (13.2% vs. 9.0%). CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to the literature, primary diagnostic procedures in the resuscitation room detected relevant diaphragmatic ruptures (AIS ≥ 3) in more than 90% of the patients in our study population. In addition, complex associated serial rib fractures are an important diagnostic indicator.

Status quo of the use of DCS concepts and outcome with focus on blunt abdominal trauma : A registry-based analysis from the TraumaRegister DGU®.

INTRODUCTION: Damage control surgery (DCS) is a standardized treatment concept in severe abdominal injury. Despite its evident advantages, DCS bears the risk of substantial morbidity and mortality, due to open abdomen therapy (OAT). Thus, identifying the suitable patients for that approach is of utmost importance. Furthermore, little is known about the use of DCS and the related outcome, especially in blunt abdominal trauma. METHODS: Patients recorded in the TraumaRegister DGU® from 2008 to 2017, and with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 9 and an abdominal injury with an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score ≥ 3 were included in that registry-based analysis. Patients with DCS and temporary abdominal closure (TAC) were compared with patients who were treated with a laparotomy and primary closure (non-DCS) and those who did receive non-operative management (NOM). Following descriptive analysis, a matched-pairs study was conducted to evaluate differences and outcomes between DCS and non-DCS group. Matching criteria were age, abdominal trauma severity, and hemodynamical instability at the scene. RESULTS: The injury mechanism was predominantly blunt (87.1%). Of the 8226 patients included, 2351 received NOM, 5011 underwent laparotomy and primary abdominal closure (non-DCS), and 864 were managed with DCS. Thus, 785 patient pairs were analysed. The rate of hepatic injuries AIS > 3 differed between the groups (DCS 50.3% vs. non-DCS 18.1%). DCS patients had a higher ISS (p = 0.023), required more significant volumes of fluids, more catecholamines, and transfusions (p < 0.001). More DCS patients were in shock at the accident scene (p = 0.022). DCS patients had a higher number of severe hepatic (AIS score ≥ 3) and gastrointestinal injuries and more vascular injuries. Most severe abdominal injuries in non-DCS patients were splenic injuries (AIS, 4 and 5) (52.1% versus 37.9%, p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: DCS is a strategy used in unstable trauma patients, severe hepatic, gastrointestinal, multiple abdominal injuries, and mass transfusions. The expected survival rates were achieved in such extreme trauma situations.

Maxillofacial injuries in severely injured patients after road traffic accidents-a retrospective evaluation of the TraumaRegister DGU® 1993-2014.

OBJECTIVES: It was the aim of the study to analyse the prevalence of maxillofacial trauma (MFT) in severely injured patients after road traffic accidence (RTA) and to investigate associated factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective study, data from patients after RTA by the TraumaRegister DGU® from 1993 to 2014 were evaluated for demographical and injury characteristics. The predictor variable was mechanism of injury and the outcome variables were type of injury, severity and hospital resources utilization. RESULTS: During the investigation period, n = 62,196 patients were enclosed with a prevalence of maxillofacial injuries of 20.3% (MFT positive). The injury severity score of MFT-positive patients was higher than in the MTF-negative subgroup (27 ± 12.8 vs. 23.0 ± 12.7). If MFT positive, 39.8% show minor, 37.1% moderate, 21.5% serious and 1.6% severe maxillofacial injuries. Injuries of the midface occurred in 60.3% of MTF-positive patients. A relevant blood loss (> 20% of total blood volume) occurred in 1.9%. MFT-positive patients had a higher coincidence with cervical spine fractures (11.3% vs. 7.8%) and traumatic brain injuries (62.6% vs. 34.8%) than MFT-negative patients. There was a noticeable decrease in the incidence of facial injuries in car/truck drivers during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Every 5th patient after RTA shows a MFT and the whole trauma team must be aware that this indicates a high prevalence of traumatic brain and cervical spine injuries. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Even if sole injuries of the face are seldom life threatening, maxillofacial expertise in interdisciplinary trauma centres is strongly recommended.

Why do some trauma patients die while others survive? A matched-pair analysis based on data from Trauma Register DGU®.

PURPOSE: The mortality rate for severely injured patients with the injury severity score (ISS) ≥16 has decreased in Germany. There is robust evidence that mortality is influenced not only by the acute trauma itself but also by physical health, age and sex. The aim of this study was to identify other possible influences on the mortality of severely injured patients. METHODS: In a matched-pair analysis of data from Trauma Register DGU®, non-surviving patients from Germany between 2009 and 2014 with an ISS≥16 were compared with surviving matching partners. Matching was performed on the basis of age, sex, physical health, injury pattern, trauma mechanism, conscious state at the scene of the accident based on the Glasgow coma scale, and the presence of shock on arrival at the emergency room. RESULTS: We matched two homogeneous groups, each of which consisted of 657 patients (535 male, average age 37 years). There was no significant difference in the vital parameters at the scene of the accident, the length of the pre-hospital phase, the type of transport (ground or air), pre-hospital fluid management and amounts, ISS, initial care level, the length of the emergency room stay, the care received at night or from on-call personnel during the weekend, the use of abdominal sonographic imaging, the type of X-ray imaging used, and the percentage of patients who developed sepsis. We found a significant difference in the new injury severity score, the frequency of multi-organ failure, hemoglobine at admission, base excess and international normalized ratio in the emergency room, the type of accident (fall or road traffic accident), the pre-hospital intubation rate, reanimation, in-hospital fluid management, the frequency of transfusion, tomography (whole-body computed tomography), and the necessity of emergency intervention. CONCLUSION: Previously postulated factors such as the level of care and the length of the emergency room stay did not appear to have a significant influence in this study. Further studies should be conducted to analyse the identified factors with a view to optimising the treatment of severely injured patients. Our study shows that there are significant factors that can predict or influence the mortality of severely injured patients.

Guidelines for conducting epidemiological studies of blast injury.

Blast injuries are often caused by more than one mechanism, do not occur in isolation, and typically elicit a secondary multi-system response. Research efforts often do not separate blast injuries caused by blast waves from those caused by blunt force trauma and other mechanisms. 15 experts from nine different NATO nations developed in the HFM Research Task Group (RTG; HFM-234 (RTG)) 'Environmental Toxicology of Blast Exposures: Injury Metrics, Modelling, Methods and Standards' Guidelines for Conducting Epidemiological Studies of Blast Injury. This paper describes these guidelines, which are intended to provide blast injury researchers and clinicians with a basic set of recommendations for blast injury epidemiological study design and data collection that need to be considered and described when conducting prospective longitudinal studies of blast injury.

A Consensus-Based Criterion Standard for the Requirement of a Trauma Team.

BACKGROUND: Trauma team activation (TTA) represents a considerable expenditure of trauma centre resources. It is mainly triggered by field triage criteria. The overall quality of the criteria may be evaluated based on the rate of over- and undertriage. However, there is no gold standard that defines which adult patients truly require a trauma team. The objective of this study was to develop consensus-based criteria defining the necessity for a trauma team. METHODS: A consensus group was formed by trauma specialists experienced in emergency and trauma care with a specific interest in field triage and having previously participated in guideline development. A literature search was conducted to identify criteria that have already been used or suggested. The initial list of criteria was discussed in two Delphi round and two consensus conferences. The entire process of discussion and voting was highly standardized and extensively documented, resulting in a final list of criteria. RESULTS: Initially 95 criteria were identified. This was subsequently reduced to 20 final criteria to appropriately indicate the requirement for attendance of a trauma team. The criteria address aspects related to injury severity, admission to an intensive care unit, death within 24 h, need for specified invasive procedures, need for surgical and/or interventional radiological procedures, and abnormal vital signs within a defined time period. CONCLUSIONS: The selected criteria may be applied as a tool for research and quality control concerning TTA. However, future studies are necessary to further evaluate for possible redundancy in criteria that may allow for further reduction in criteria.

Anterior management of C2 fractures using miniplate fixation: outcome, function and quality of life in a case series of 15 patients.

PURPOSE: The classification systems by Anderson and D'Alonzo, Effendi, Benzel and others have limitations when it comes to morphologically categorising fractures of the second cervical vertebral body (C2) that present with or without an additional fracture of the dens or with or without an extension of the fracture line into the vertebral arch and displacement. Currently, there are no definitive recommendations for the treatment of fractures at the junction of the dens with the vertebral body of C2 on the basis of outcome and stability data. Depending on patient anatomy, either anterior or posterior approaches can be used to fuse C1 and C2 and to achieve definitive surgical stabilisation. The anterior management of C2 fractures without C1-C2 fusion has the theoretical advantage that it preserves rotational motion at this motion segment and that the anterior approach is associated with lower morbidity. In the study presented here, we followed up a group of our patients who underwent anterior miniplate fixation for C2 fractures. METHODS: Fifteen patients underwent fixation of C2 fractures with titanium miniplates (Medartis Hand fixation system, 2.0 or 2.3 mm) that were placed using a submental approach. To our knowledge, this construct has not yet been described in the literature. Where necessary, this procedure was combined with screw fixation of the dens as described by Böhler. We retrospectively analysed operative reports and medical records, evaluated the patients' health status using the Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36), and performed clinical follow-up examinations. RESULTS: From January 2009 to June 2015, 226 traumatic lesions of the cervical spine were managed at our institution in the inpatient setting. Ninety-two patients underwent conservative treatment. Of the 134 cases that required surgery for fractures and instability, 67 involved the C0-C3 motion segments. In 15 patients, stability was achieved using an anterior miniplate or miniscrews alone (n = 4) or in addition to other techniques (n = 11). Anderson and D'Alonzo type II and III dens fractures with involvement of the body or lateral mass of C2 accounted for eight cases. Effendi type II body fractures with or without instability were seen in four cases. There was no perioperative mortality and morbidity in this patient group. All fractures healed and stability was achieved in all cases. No patient had neurological deficits or required revision surgery. An assessment of postoperative quality of life showed that 11 patients (7 men, 4 women) with a mean age of 57 (± 5.3) years reached an SF-36 score that was normal for their age group after a mean period of 33 (± 6.3) months following their injury. Compared to a group of healthy subjects, the patients had a range of motion that was limited only at the extremes. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with appropriate indications, anterior fixation with miniplates alone or additionally is a further useful treatment option in the management of fractures at the junction of the dens with the vertebral body of C2. Since this type of treatment preserves motion at the C1-C2 motion segment after fracture healing and since an anterior approach is associated with less surgical trauma than posterior instrumentation, the technique presented here should be included in a discussion on (surgical) treatment options. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

[Characteristics and Treatment Strategies for Penetrating Injuries on the Example of Gunshot and Blast Victims without Ballistic Body Armour in Afghanistan (2009 - 2013)]. / Besonderheiten und Versorgung penetrierender Verletzungen am Beispiel von Schuss- und Explosionsopfern ohne ballistischen Körperschutz in Afghanistan (2009 ­â€Š2013).

Much like other countries, Germany has recently seen terrorist attacks being planned, executed or prevented at the last minute. This highlights the need for expertise in the treatment of penetrating torso traumas by bullets or explosions. Data on the treatment of firearm injuries and, even more so, blast injuries often stems from crises or war regions. However, it is difficult to compare injuries from such regions with injuries from civilian terrorist attacks due to the ballistic body protection (protective vests, body armour) worn by soldiers. Methods An analysis was performed based on data from patients who were treated in the German Military Hospital Mazar-e Sharif for gunshots or injuries from explosions in the years 2009 to 2013. The data selection was based on patients with penetrating injuries to the thorax and/or abdomen. For better comparability with civilian attack scenarios, this study only included civilian patients without ballistic body protection (body armour, protective vests). Results Out of 117 analysed patients, 58 were affected by firearms and 59 by explosive injuries of the thorax or abdomen. 60% of patients had a thoracic injury, 69% had an abdominal injury, and 25.6% had combined thoracic-abdominal injuries. Blast injury patients were significantly more affected by thoracic trauma. As regards abdominal injuries, liver, intestinal, and colonic lesions were leading in number. Patients with blast injuries had significantly more injured organs and a significantly higher ISS averaging 29. 26% of the shot patients and 41% of the blast wounded patients received Damage Control Surgery (DCS). Despite a lower ISS, gunshot victims did not have a lower total number of operations per patient. Overall mortality was 13.7% (10.3% gunshot wounds, 16.7% blast injury). The highest mortality rate (25.7%) was recorded for patients with combined thoracoabdominal injuries (vs. 8.3% for thoracic and 8.7% for abdominal injuries). The ISS of deceased patients was significantly higher at 32.9%. Conclusion Patients without ballistic protection of the torso have high mortality rates, especially when suffering thoracoabdominal blast injuries. Blast injuries frequently lead to the DCS indication. The care of firearm and blast injury patients requires knowledge and competence in the damage control procedures for thorax and abdomen.

Application of the PANELVIEW instrument to evaluate the guideline development process of the German polytrauma guideline.

BACKGROUND: PANELVIEW is an instrument for evaluating the appropriateness of the process, methods, and outcome of guideline development and the satisfaction of the guideline group with these steps. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the guideline development process of the German guideline on the treatment of patients with severe/multiple injuries ('German polytrauma guideline') from the perspective of the guideline group, and to identify areas where this process may be improved in the future. METHODS: We administered PANELVIEW to the participants of the 2022 update of the German polytrauma guideline. All guideline group members, including delegates of participating medical societies, steering group members, authors of guideline chapters, the chair, and methodological lead, were invited to participate. Responses were analysed using descriptive statistics. Comments received were categorised by domains/items of the tool. RESULTS: After the first, second, and last consensus conference, the guideline group was invited via email to participate in a web-based survey. Response rates were 36% (n/N = 13/36), 40% (12/30), and 37% (20/54), respectively. The mean scores for items ranged between 5.1 and 6.9 on a scale from 1 (fully disagree) to 7 (fully agree). Items with mean scores below 6.0 were related to (1) administration, (2) consideration of patients' views, perspectives, values, and preferences, and (3) the discussion of research gaps and needs for future research. CONCLUSION: The PANELVIEW tool showed that the guideline group was satisfied with most aspects of the guideline development process. Areas for improvement of the process were identified. Strategies to improve response rates should be explored.

[Treatment of the wounded from the war in Ukraine in the trauma networks of the DGU-Requirement, reality and motivation over the course of 18 months ]. / Versorgung von Kriegsverletzten aus der Ukraine in den Traumanetzwerken der DGU ­ Anspruch, Wirklichkeit und Motivation im Verlauf von 18 Monaten .

BACKGROUND: The war in Ukraine and the medical treatment of the wounded in hospitals in Germany has now represented a challenge for more than 15 months. The majority of trauma patients were distributed via the general holding center (GMLZ) at the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) by the cloverleaf concept and the trauma networks. Initially, numerous offers of assistance were promoted with great solidarity. For documentation of the current motivation situation and also for identification of the potential for improvement, a 2-stage survey of senior physicians in the organized and certified hospitals in the trauma networks was carried out. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An online survey of senior physicians of the trauma network hospitals was carried out with a semistructured written questionnaire in December 2022 and a follow-up survey during the Trauma Network Meeting (TNT) Congress in September 2023 in Frankfurt. RESULTS: Of the questionnaires 113 could be evaluated in December 2022 and 70 completed questionnaires in September 2023. The answers came from national trauma centers (ÜTZ), regional trauma centers (RTZ) and local trauma centers (LTZ) each with approximately one third. On average 2.7 patients were treated in all participating hospitals up to December and up to September no more than 5 in more than half of the hospitals overall. The main challenges for all participants at both points in time were the long hospital stay, the demanding pathogen status and sometimes unclarified or not completely covered reimbursement of costs. Nevertheless, more than 80% of the specialist departments received backing from their hospital sponsors as well as their personnel for the continuing treatment of the wounded from Ukraine. CONCLUSION: The medical and professional challenges in the treatment of the wounded from Ukraine are, as expected, characterized by the demanding injury patterns of the musculoskeletal system and the colonization with multidrug-resistant pathogens. This results in a long course of treatment, where the remuneration does not always cover the costs. Despite these challenges the solidarity in the hospitals of the trauma networks is unbroken. Simultaneously, there are numerous possibilities for improvement in order to enhance the prerequisites for future comparable humanitarian assistance jointly with politics.

[National challenges for trauma surgery in Germany due to violence and war]. / Nationale Herausforderungen für die Unfallchirurgie in Deutschland bei Gewalt und Krieg.

Due to the war in Ukraine and the treatment of patients with war wounds in the hospitals of the TraumaNetworks of the German Society for Trauma Surgery (TraumaNetzwerke DGU®), injuries from life-threatening mission situations (LebEL), terrorism, violence and war have become a matter of daily professional life. Furthermore, the societal and global feeling of security has fundamentally changed. The much-cited term "turning point in history", the reorientation of the Armed Forces and the investigation of the resilience of the healthcare system with respect to the "fitness for war", approximate to the description of the current challenges for trauma surgery (UCH) in Germany. Based on the developments following the terrorist attacks in Paris in 2015 and in Brussels in 2016, a clarification is given as to which adaptations have already been successful and how quickly an improvement could successfully be achieved. In this context, the concept of tactical care and the course on Terror and Disaster Surgical Care (TDSC), for example, have been game changing. The main challenge currently lies in overcoming the structural alterations in the German healthcare system and professionally in the treatment of war wounded personnel from Ukraine. The knowledge gained from these two national tasks must be analyzed for the future development and adaptation of established treatment structures, e.g., of the TraumaNetzwerke DGU®, under the requirements of the increased resilience against war, terrorism and violence. The aim is to name that which has already been achieved with respect to the national challenges for UCH and at the same time to outline or discuss further necessities for improvements and elimination of possible gaps in capabilities.

[Initial in-hospital treatment of patients with penetrating trauma due to violence and war]. / Innerklinische Erstversorgung von Patienten mit penetrierendem Trauma nach Gewalt und Krieg.

BACKGROUND: Current political and social developments have brought the topics of violence, in this context attributable to terrorism and sabotage, and since February 2022 awareness of war in particular has again greatly increased. This article aims to present the contextualized dealing with penetrating injuries in terms of initial in-hospital treatment. OBJECTIVE: The question remains to be answered as to what extent penetrating injuries require special attention and to what extent the treatment priorities, options and strategies as well as surgical treatment require adaptation of the usual approach in routine clinical practice in Germany. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The experience of the authors in this field from military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Republic of Mali, Kosovo and Georgia as well as the core content of the Terror and Disaster Surgical Care (TDSC®) course on this topic, have been contextualized and incorporated. In addition, aspects of a comprehensive systematic literature review and current data from a national evaluation on the topic of preparing hospitals in Germany for such scenarios are taken into account. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The clinical systems need to be well-prepared for such casualties, especially if they require treatment in large numbers. This is precisely so because the majority of patients are in a relevantly threatening situation (usually in the sense of a hemorrhage), treatment must be very urgently provided and in such scenarios a lack of resources must always be overcome, at least temporarily, especially for example for blood transfusions.

[Utilization of registers to create an evidence-based approach in catastrophes and civil defence]. / Nutzung von Registern zur Schaffung eines evidenzbasierten Vorgehens im Katastrophen- und Zivilschutzfall.

Medical data registers are a key instrument of medical care research and a valuable tool for medical quality assurance. The structured plausibility tested documentation of large case numbers on a longitudinally oriented time axis with different points in time of data acquisition enables statements to be made on numerous relevant outcomes, not only the mortality of patients. For incidents outside the daily routine care in trauma surgery, such as natural disasters, accidents with multiple casualties and nonmilitary treatment of the domestic population in defence situations, such registers can provide data-based recommendations for action. These data, mainly obtained from routine traumatological treatment, enable a targeted resource management in the abovenamed incidents, which are associated with mass casualties. Due to the utilization of registers from the military field or from international registers, the perspective is additionally extended with respect to treatment strategies and injury patterns. Whether data can also be generated in a suitable manner for the abovenamed registers in specific disaster situations and can provide a direct gain of knowledge from the incident, must be critically discussed. The maintenance of the register datasets is time-consuming and has been subjected to a more stringent regulation at least since May 2018, when the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (EU-GDPR) came into force. The future Register Act in Germany will hopefully achieve greater simplification in the documentation of routine data.

New Recommendations for the Care of Severely Injured Patients: Revision of the S3 Guideline on Treatment of Polytrauma/Severe Injuries. / Neue Empfehlungen zur Schwerverletzten-Versorgung: die Novellierung der S3-Leitlinie Polytrauma/Schwerverletzten-Behandlung.

Die 3. Überarbeitung der S3-Leitlinie Polytrauma/Schwerverletzten-Behandlung wurde unter der Federführung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie (DGU) von insgesamt 26 Fachgesellschaften und Organisationen durchgeführt und stellt eine umfassende Aktualisierung der Handlungsempfehlungen zur Schwerverletzten-Versorgung auf Basis neuer wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse und Studien dar. Die Leitlinie enthält 332 Kernempfehlungen unterschiedlicher Empfehlungsgrade und dazugehörige Erläuterungen, die Expertenwissen und über 2400 zitierte Literaturstellen berücksichtigen und somit das höchste Niveau (S3) einer Leitlinie erfüllen. Die Änderungen, insbesondere zur Schockraumalarmierung, sind für den Rettungsdienst von besonderer Bedeutung. Zwei neue Kapitel mit Empfehlungen für die Blutstillung und Schmerzbehandlung in der prähospitalen Versorgung wurden hinzugefügt, insgesamt bleibt die Leitlinie ein wichtiger Standard für Entscheidungsfindungen bei Diagnostik und Therapie von Schwerverletzten.

[Development of violence-associated penetrating trauma in the Düsseldorf metropolitan region over a 5-year period (GewPen study)]. / Entwicklung gewaltassoziierter penetrierender Traumata in der Metropolregion Düsseldorf über einen fünfjährigen Zeitraum (GewPen-Studie).

INTRODUCTION: Penetrating injuries are a rare but recurring emergency situation in the out-of-hospital and in-hospital emergency settings. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence and characteristics of injuries associated with penetrating violence across a German metropolitan region over a 5-year period. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In the retrospective study, a database query of the control center of the Düsseldorf rescue service area was used to identify and descriptively analyze all rescue service operations with penetrating violence-associated injuries in the years 2015, 2017, and 2019. For those patients who were transferred to the major trauma center, a further analysis of the in-hospital course was performed. RESULTS: In the 3 years 2015, 2017 and 2019 a total of 266 patients (age: 33 ± 14 years, male: 79%) could be recorded (2015 vs. 2017 vs. 2019: n = 81 vs. n = 93 vs. n = 92, respectively). The most common age group involved had an age range of 15-34 years. A particularly higher frequency of emergency calls was found for the areas of Old Town, City Center, and one other district (Oberbilk). A high frequency of rescue missions was found in the nights from Saturday to Sunday between 20.00 p.m. and 04.00 a.m. Rescue missions with emergency physicians on board increased over the years (2015 vs. 2019: 27 vs. 42%, p = 0.04). The primary weapons used were knives (56%), broken glass bottles (18%) and broken glasses (6%). Out of all patients 71 (27%, injury severity score 11 ± 14) were admitted to the major trauma center. Among these patients, the proportion of immediate surgical care (2015 vs. 2019: 20% vs. 35%, p < 0.05) and positive alcohol detection increased over the years (2015 vs. 2019: 10% vs. 43%, p < 0.05). The 30-day mortality in the 3 years studied was 1.1% (n = 3). CONCLUSION: Penetrating injuries associated with violence are relevant but rare rescue missions. Future care strategies should focus on deployment of rescue resources close to the scene of the incident ("old town guard", central station), and prevention strategies should focus on weapon prohibition zones. A control of alcohol consumption should be discussed.

[Microbiological challenges in the treatment of war injuries]. / Mikrobiologische Herausforderungen bei der Versorgung von Kriegsverletzungen.

The treatment of war injuries represents a continuing and recurrent challenge in modern reconstructive surgery. Previously, tumor resections and sepsis-related resections were mainly responsible for lengthy bone defects in Germany. In recent years another picture has increasingly emerged, particularly caused by the medical support of Ukraine. Aspects of military surgery are also becoming more important in civil hospitals, especially in the treatment of gunshot and explosion injuries. In Germany, war injuries are currently secondarily treated, as the distribution of patients is carried out according to the cloverleaf principle, weeks or months after the occurrence of the primary injury. In addition to complex bone and soft tissue defects of the extremities following such injuries, which often affect neural and vascular structures, reconstruction is often complicated by an increasing spectrum of multidrug-resistant pathogens. The definition of microbiological terms, such as contamination, colonization, critical colonization, local and systemic infections are important in the clinical routine in order to initiate a targeted treatment, especially in treatment with antibiotics. Wound swabs for determination of the spectrum of pathogens and the optimal testing of resistance are important for selecting the appropriate antibiotic agents. The concept of antibiotic stewardship (ABS) is established in many hospitals to improve the quality of antibiotic treatment and to minimize the formation of resistance. The selection of the method of reconstruction depends on the condition of the patient, the overall clinical constellation and the function to be expected after completion of treatment. The treatment of injuries due to violence and terrorism necessitates clear concepts and an interdisciplinary approach, especially with respect to microbiological challenges and increasing resistance situations.