Under-Triage and Over-Triage Using the Field Triage Guidelines for Injured Patients: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: The Field Triage Guidelines (FTG) are used across North America to identify seriously injured patients for transport to appropriate level trauma centers, with a goal of under-triaging no more than 5% and over-triaging between 25% and 35%. Our objective was to systematically review the literature on under-triage and over-triage rates of the FTG. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the FTG performance. Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane databases were searched for studies published between January 2011 and February 2021. Two investigators dual-reviewed eligibility of abstracts and full-text. We included studies evaluating under- or over-triage of patients using the FTG in the prehospital setting. We excluded studies not reporting an outcome of under- or over-triage, studies evaluating other triage tools, or studies of triage not in the prehospital setting. Two investigators independently assessed the risk of bias for each included article. The primary accuracy measures to assess the FTG were under-triage, defined as seriously injured patients transported to non-trauma hospitals (1-sensitivity), and over-triage, defined as non-injured patients transported to trauma hospitals (1-specificity). Due to heterogeneity, results were synthesized qualitatively. RESULTS: We screened 2,418 abstracts, reviewed 315 full-text publications, and identified 17 studies that evaluated the accuracy of the FTG. Among eight studies evaluating the entire FTG (steps 1-4), under-triage rates ranged from 1.6% to 72.0% and were higher for older (≥55 or ≥65 years) adults (20.1-72.0%) and pediatric (<15 years) patients (15.9-34.8%) compared to all ages (1.6-33.8%). Over-triage rates ranged from 9.9% to 87.4% and were higher for all ages (12.2-87.4%) compared to older (≥55 or ≥65 years) adults (9.9-48.2%) and pediatric (<15 years) patients (28.0-33.6%). Under-triage was lower in studies strictly applying the FTG retrospectively (1.6-34.8%) compared to as-practiced (10.5-72.0%), while over-triage was higher retrospectively (64.2-87.4%) compared to as-practiced (9.9-48.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that under-triage, while improved if the FTG is strictly applied, remains above targets, with higher rates of under-triage in both children and older adults.

Sigh Ventilation in Patients With Trauma: The SiVent Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Among patients receiving mechanical ventilation, tidal volumes with each breath are often constant or similar. This may lead to ventilator-induced lung injury by altering or depleting surfactant. The role of sigh breaths in reducing ventilator-induced lung injury among trauma patients at risk of poor outcomes is unknown. Objective: To determine whether adding sigh breaths improves clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pragmatic, randomized trial of sigh breaths plus usual care conducted from 2016 to 2022 with 28-day follow-up in 15 academic trauma centers in the US. Inclusion criteria were age older than 18 years, mechanical ventilation because of trauma for less than 24 hours, 1 or more of 5 risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, expected duration of ventilation longer than 24 hours, and predicted survival longer than 48 hours. Interventions: Sigh volumes producing plateau pressures of 35 cm H2O (or 40 cm H2O for inpatients with body mass indexes >35) delivered once every 6 minutes. Usual care was defined as the patient's physician(s) treating the patient as they wished. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcomes included all-cause 28-day mortality. Results: Of 5753 patients screened, 524 were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 43.9 [19.2] years; 394 [75.2%] were male). The median ventilator-free days was 18.4 (IQR, 7.0-25.2) in patients randomized to sighs and 16.1 (IQR, 1.1-24.4) in those receiving usual care alone (P = .08). The unadjusted mean difference in ventilator-free days between groups was 1.9 days (95% CI, 0.1 to 3.6) and the prespecified adjusted mean difference was 1.4 days (95% CI, -0.2 to 3.0). For the prespecified secondary outcome, patients randomized to sighs had 28-day mortality of 11.6% (30/259) vs 17.6% (46/261) in those receiving usual care (P = .05). No differences were observed in nonfatal adverse events comparing patients with sighs (80/259 [30.9%]) vs those without (80/261 [30.7%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In a pragmatic, randomized trial among trauma patients receiving mechanical ventilation with risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, the addition of sigh breaths did not significantly increase ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcome data suggest that sighs are well-tolerated and may improve clinical outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02582957.

Older Adults With Isolated Rib Fractures Do Not Require Routine Intensive Care Unit Admission.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with isolated rib fractures are often admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) because of presumedly increased morbidity and mortality. However, evidence-based guidelines are limited. We sought to identify characteristics of these patients that predict the need for ICU care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed patients ≥50 y old at our center during 2013-2017 whose only indication for ICU admission, if any, was isolated rib fractures. The primary outcome was any critical care intervention (e.g., intubation) or adverse event (e.g., hypoxemia) (CCIE) based on accepted critical care guidelines. We used stepwise logistic regression to identify characteristics that predict CCIEs. RESULTS: Among 401 patients, 251 (63%) were admitted to an ICU. Eighty-three patients (33%) admitted to an ICU and 7 (5%) admitted to the ward experienced a CCIE. The most common CCIEs were hypotension (10%), frequent respiratory therapy (9%), and oxygen desaturation (8%). Predictors of CCIEs included incentive spirometry <1 L (OR 4.72, 95% CI 2.14-10.45); use of a walker (OR 2.86, 95% CI 1.29-6.34); increased chest Abbreviated Injury Scale score (AIS 3 OR 5.83, 95% CI 2.34-14.50); age ≥72 y (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.48-4.86); and active smoking (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.06-4.20). CONCLUSIONS: Routine ICU admission is not necessary for most older adults with isolated rib fractures. The predictors we identified warrant prospective evaluation for development of a clinical decision rule to preclude unnecessary ICU admissions.

Vitamin C in surgical sepsis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The current review discusses the supplemental use of vitamin C as an adjunct in the management of sepsis and septic shock. RECENT FINDINGS: The antioxidant properties of vitamin C are touted to be useful in modulating the inflammatory response, decreasing vasopressor requirements, and improving resuscitation. Current resuscitation practices are focused on addressing the hemodynamic instability and ensuring adequate oxygen delivery to tissues. The conceptual framework of the use of vitamin C during a resuscitation is to modulate in a beneficial fashion the inflammatory response to sepsis while concomitantly resuscitating and treating the infection. While there is promising animal and burn-related data on improved fluid resuscitation with the use of vitamin C as an adjunct, the most recent meta-analyses of the available data fail to show a survival benefit in sepsis, and concerns regarding nephrotoxicity remain. SUMMARY: Although there are large number of animal studies, only a few small prospective and retrospective studies in humans address the use of vitamin C to treat sepsis. Further research in a controlled and randomized fashion is needed to determine if vitamin C is effective in this role. While there is a promise of ascorbate's addition to the sepsis bundle as an adjunct to resuscitation, the evidence is not conclusive.

Overcoming adversity-a critical step toward career satisfaction and leadership in academic surgery.

The experiences of life are what shape us. This article relays stories of adversity and resiliency as experienced and told by members of our own surgical community at the Academic Surgical Congress in Las Vegas, NV in February 2017. We aim to express in words the lessons of each experience so that others can learn about life and leadership.

Goal-directed Hemostatic Resuscitation of Trauma-induced Coagulopathy: A Pragmatic Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing a Viscoelastic Assay to Conventional Coagulation Assays.

BACKGROUND: Massive transfusion protocols (MTPs) have become standard of care in the management of bleeding injured patients, yet strategies to guide them vary widely. We conducted a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial (RCT) to test the hypothesis that an MTP goal directed by the viscoelastic assay thrombelastography (TEG) improves survival compared with an MTP guided by conventional coagulation assays (CCA). METHODS: This RCT enrolled injured patients from an academic level-1 trauma center meeting criteria for MTP activation. Upon MTP activation, patients were randomized to be managed either by an MTP goal directed by TEG or by CCA (ie, international normalized ratio, fibrinogen, platelet count). Primary outcome was 28-day survival. RESULTS: One hundred eleven patients were included in an intent-to-treat analysis (TEG = 56, CCA = 55). Survival in the TEG group was significantly higher than the CCA group (log-rank P = 0.032, Wilcoxon P = 0.027); 20 deaths in the CCA group (36.4%) compared with 11 in the TEG group (19.6%) (P = 0.049). Most deaths occurred within the first 6 hours from arrival (21.8% CCA group vs 7.1% TEG group) (P = 0.032). CCA patients required similar number of red blood cell units as the TEG patients [CCA: 5.0 (2-11), TEG: 4.5 (2-8)] (P = 0.317), but more plasma units [CCA: 2.0 (0-4), TEG: 0.0 (0-3)] (P = 0.022), and more platelets units [CCA: 0.0 (0-1), TEG: 0.0 (0-0)] (P = 0.041) in the first 2 hours of resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of a goal-directed, TEG-guided MTP to resuscitate severely injured patients improves survival compared with an MTP guided by CCA and utilizes less plasma and platelet transfusions during the early phase of resuscitation.

The Application of the CRASH-CT Prognostic Model for Older Adults With Traumatic Brain Injury: A Population-Based Observational Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the performance of the Corticosteroid Randomization After Significant Head injury (CRASH) trial prognostic model in older patients with traumatic brain injury. SETTING: The National Study on Costs and Outcomes of Trauma cohort, established at 69 hospitals in the United States in 2001 and 2002. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with traumatic brain injury and an initial Glasgow Coma Scale score of 14 or less. DESIGN: The CRASH-CT model predicting death within 14 days was deployed in all patients. Model performance in older patients (aged 65-84 years) was compared with that in younger patients (aged 18-64 years). MAIN MEASURES: Model discrimination (as defined by the c-statistic) and calibration (as defined by the Hosmer-Lemeshow P value). RESULTS: CRASH-CT model discrimination was not significantly different between the older (n = 356; weighted n = 524) and younger patients (n = 981; weighted n = 2602) and was generally adequate (c-statistic 0.83 vs 0.87, respectively; P = .11). CRASH-CT model calibration was adequate for the older patients and inadequate for younger patients (Hosmer-Lemeshow P values .12 and .001, respectively), possibly reflecting differences in sample size. Calibration-in-the-large showed no systematic under- or overprediction in either stratum. CONCLUSION: The CRASH-CT model may be valid for use in a geriatric population.

The application of IMPACT prognostic models to elderly adults with traumatic brain injury: A population-based observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the performance of the International Mission for Prognosis and Clinical Trial Design in Traumatic Brain Injury (IMPACT) prognostic models in older patients. METHODS: Using data from the National Study on Costs and Outcomes of Trauma (NSCOT), this study identified adult patients presenting to US hospitals in 2001 and 2002 with non-penetrating moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (GCS ≤ 12). IMPACT model calibration and discrimination in the older stratum (65-84 years) was compared to that in the younger stratum (18-64 years). RESULTS: IMPACT model discrimination did not differ significantly between the older (n = 202; weighted n = 268) and younger strata (n = 613; weighted n = 1632) and was generally adequate (c-statistic for the core-death model = 0.81 [0.77-0.84] vs 0.75 [0.66-0.84], respectively; p = 0.26). IMPACT model calibration was poor for both older and younger strata (Hosmer-Lemeshow p-value for the core-death model = 0.01 vs < 0.0001, respectively). Pre-specified qualitative graphical evaluation suggested substantial under-prediction of mortality in the oldest decades of life, but not among younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: The examined IMPACT prognostic models demonstrated adequate discrimination and poor calibration in both older and younger patients, yet particular caution may be required when applying these models to the elderly.

Enteral contrast in the computed tomography diagnosis of appendicitis: comparative effectiveness in a prospective surgical cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to perform a comparative effectiveness study of intravenous (IV)-only versus IV + enteral contrast in computed tomographic (CT) scans performed for patients undergoing appendectomy across a diverse group of hospitals. BACKGROUND: Small randomized trials from tertiary centers suggest that enteral contrast does not improve diagnostic performance of CT for suspected appendicitis, but generalizability has not been demonstrated. Eliminating enteral contrast may improve efficiency, patient comfort, and safety. METHODS: We analyzed data for adult patients who underwent nonelective appendectomy at 56 hospitals over a 2-year period. Data were obtained directly from patient charts by trained abstractors. Multivariate logistic regression was utilized to adjust for potential confounding. The main outcome measure was concordance between final radiology interpretation and final pathology report. RESULTS: A total of 9047 adults underwent appendectomy and 8089 (89.4%) underwent CT, 54.1% of these with IV contrast only and 28.5% with IV + enteral contrast. Pathology findings correlated with radiographic findings in 90.0% of patients who received IV + enteral contrast and 90.4% of patients scanned with IV contrast alone. Hospitals were categorized as rural or urban and by their teaching status. Regardless of hospital type, there was no difference in concordance between IV-only and IV + enteral contrast. After adjusting for age, sex, comorbid conditions, weight, hospital type, and perforation, odds ratio of concordance for IV + enteral contrast versus IV contrast alone was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.72-1.25). CONCLUSIONS: Enteral contrast does not improve CT evaluation of appendicitis in patients undergoing appendectomy. These broadly generalizable results from a diverse group of hospitals suggest that enteral contrast can be eliminated in CT scans for suspected appendicitis.

Effects of gender on work-life balance satisfaction among trauma surgeons: A survey study.

BACKGROUND: Physician burnout rates are rising. Because dissatisfaction with work-life balance (WLB) is associated with burnout, improving this balance is a key solution. This cross-sectional survey study aims to evaluate factors associated with WLB in trauma surgeons, stratified by gender. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis, studying gender, of a AAST survey evaluating predictors of WLB in trauma surgeons. Survey topics include demographics, clinical practice, family, lifestyle, and emotional support. Subgroups were analyzed independently; primary outcome was WLB satisfaction. RESULTS: 292 AAST members completed the survey. Responses were stratified by gender (29% females, 71% males). Independent predictors of WLB satisfaction are: Females: more awake hours at home, having a job well-suited for them, better about meeting deadlines. Males: comfortable declining new tasks, fair compensation, healthy diet, workplace emotional support. CONCLUSION: Factors associated with WLB satisfaction in trauma surgeons are different based on gender. This information may help trauma surgeons mitigate burnout.

Guidelines for field triage of injured patients: recommendations of the National Expert Panel on Field Triage, 2011.

In the United States, injury is the leading cause of death for persons aged 1-44 years. In 2008, approximately 30 million injuries were serious enough to require the injured person to visit a hospital emergency department (ED); 5.4 million (18%) of these injured patients were transported by Emergency Medical Services (EMS). On arrival at the scene of an injury, the EMS provider must determine the severity of injury, initiate management of the patient's injuries, and decide the most appropriate destination hospital for the individual patient. These destination decisions are made through a process known as "field triage," which involves an assessment not only of the physiology and anatomy of injury but also of the mechanism of the injury and special patient and system considerations. Since 1986, the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS-COT) has provided guidance for the field triage process through its "Field Triage Decision Scheme." This guidance was updated with each version of the decision scheme (published in 1986, 1990, 1993, and 1999). In 2005, CDC, with financial support from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, collaborated with ACS-COT to convene the initial meetings of the National Expert Panel on Field Triage (the Panel) to revise the decision scheme; the revised version was published in 2006 by ACS-COT (American College of Surgeons. Resources for the optimal care of the injured patient: 2006. Chicago, IL: American College of Surgeons; 2006). In 2009, CDC published a detailed description of the scientific rationale for revising the field triage criteria (CDC. Guidelines for field triage of injured patients: recommendations of the National Expert Panel on Field Triage. MMWR 2009;58[No. RR-1]). In 2011, CDC reconvened the Panel to review the 2006 Guidelines in the context of recently published literature, assess the experiences of states and local communities working to implement the Guidelines, and recommend any needed changes or modifications to the Guidelines. This report describes the dissemination and impact of the 2006 Guidelines; outlines the methodology used by the Panel for its 2011 review; explains the revisions and modifications to the physiologic, anatomic, mechanism-of-injury, and special considerations criteria; updates the schematic of the 2006 Guidelines; and provides the rationale used by the Panel for these changes. This report is intended to help prehospital-care providers in their daily duties recognize individual injured patients who are most likely to benefit from specialized trauma center resources and is not intended as a mass casualty or disaster triage tool. The Panel anticipates a review of these Guidelines approximately every 5 years.

Does EMS perceived anatomic injury predict trauma center need?

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine the predictive value of the anatomic step of the 2011 Field Triage Decision Scheme for identifying trauma center need. METHODS: Emergency medical services (EMS) providers caring for injured adults transported to regional trauma centers in three midsized communities were interviewed over two years. Patients were included, regardless of injury severity, if they were at least 18 years old and were transported by EMS with a mechanism of injury that was an assault, motor vehicle or motorcycle crash, fall, or pedestrian or bicyclist struck. The interview was conducted upon emergency department (ED) arrival and collected physiologic condition and anatomic injury data. Patients who met the physiologic criteria were excluded. Trauma center need was defined as nonorthopedic surgery within 24 hours, intensive care unit admission, or death prior to hospital discharge. Data were analyzed by calculating descriptive statistics, including positive likelihood ratios (+LRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 11,892 interviews were conducted. One was excluded because of missing outcome data and 1,274 were excluded because they met the physiologic step. EMS providers identified 1,167 cases that met the anatomic criteria, of which 307 (26%) needed the resources of a trauma center (38% sensitivity, 91% specificity, +LR 4.4; CI: 3.9-4.9). Criteria with a +LR ≥5 were flail chest (9.0; CI: 4.1-19.4), paralysis (6.8; CI: 4.2-11.2), two or more long-bone fractures (6.3; CI: 4.5-8.9), and amputation (6.1; CI: 1.5-24.4). Criteria with a +LR >2 and <5 were penetrating injury (4.8; CI: 4.2-5.6) and skull fracture (4.8; CI: 3.0-7.7). Only pelvic fracture (1.9; CI: 1.3-2.9) had a +LR less than 2. CONCLUSIONS: The anatomic step of the Field Triage Guidelines as determined by EMS providers is a reasonable tool for determining trauma center need. Use of EMS perceived pelvic fracture as an indicator for trauma center need should be reevaluated. Key words: wounds and injury; triage; emergency medical services; emergency medical technicians.

National variation in outcomes and costs for splenic injury and the impact of trauma systems: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To measure national variation in splenectomy rates, mortality, and costs for hospitalized patients with splenic injury and the impact of state trauma systems on these outcomes. METHODS: Using the HCUP State Inpatient Database for 2001, 2004, and 2007, all patients hospitalized with splenic injury were identified from 19 participating states. Multivariate regression was performed to compare splenectomy rates, inpatient mortality, and costs between states. Inclusiveness of statewide trauma systems was categorized based on the proportion of hospitals designated as a trauma center. RESULTS: Of 33,131 patients, 26.2% underwent splenectomy, 6.1% died, and median hospital costs were $14,317. After adjusting for patient, injury, and hospital characteristics, there was a 1.7-fold variation (RR 1.67; 95% CI, 1.39-2.01) among the 19 states in rates of splenectomy. Adjusted inpatient mortality varied more than 2-fold between the highest and lowest states (RR 2.43; 95% CI, 1.76-3.37). Adjusted hospital costs varied over 60% between the highest and lowest states (cost ratio 1.61; 95% CI, 1.41-1.83). States with the most inclusive trauma systems had significantly lower splenectomy rate (RR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.92) and lower mortality (RR 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.87), but similar hospital costs (CR 1.05; 95% CI, 0.95-1.16) compared to states with exclusive or no trauma systems. CONCLUSIONS: Significant geographic variation in the management, outcome, and costs for splenic injury exists in the United States, and may reflect differences in quality of care. Inclusive trauma systems seem to improve outcomes without increasing hospital costs.

Progress in the diagnosis of appendicitis: a report from Washington State's Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Studies suggest that computed tomography and ultrasonography can effectively diagnose and rule out appendicitis, safely reducing negative appendectomies (NAs); however, some within the surgical community remain reluctant to add imaging to clinical evaluation of patients with suspected appendicitis. The Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program (SCOAP) is a physician-led quality initiative that monitors performance by benchmarking processes of care and outcomes. Since 2006, accurate diagnosis of appendicitis has been a priority for SCOAP. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between imaging and NA in the general community. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively for consecutive appendectomy patients (age > 15 years) at nearly 60 hospitals. SCOAP data are obtained directly from clinical records, including radiological, operative, and pathological reports. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to examine the association between imaging and NA. Tests for trends over time were also conducted. RESULTS: Among 19,327 patients (47.9% female) who underwent appendectomy, 5.4% had NA. Among patients who were imaged, frequency of NA was 4.5%, whereas among those who were not imaged, it was 15.4% (P < 0.001). This association was consistent for men (3% vs 10%, P < 0.001) and for women of reproductive age (6.9% vs 24.7%, P < 0.001). In a multivariate model adjusted for age, sex, and white blood cell count, odds of NA for patients not imaged were 3.7 times the odds for those who received imaging (95% CI: 3.0-4.4). Among SCOAP hospitals, use of imaging increased and NA decreased significantly over time; frequency of perforation was unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who were not imaged during workup for suspected appendicitis had more than 3 times the odds of NA as those who were imaged. Routine imaging in the evaluation of patients suspected to have appendicitis can safely reduce unnecessary operations. Programs such as SCOAP improve care through peer-led, benchmarked practice change.

Patient and clinician perceptions of the trauma and acute care surgery hospitalization discharge transition of care: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Trauma and acute care surgery (TACS) patients face complex barriers associated with hospitalization discharge that hinder successful recovery. We sought to better understand the challenges in the discharge transition of care, which might suggest interventions that would optimize it. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study of patient and clinician perceptions about the hospital discharge process at an urban level 1 trauma center. We performed semi-structured interviews that we recorded, transcribed, coded both deductively and inductively, and analyzed thematically. We enrolled patients and clinicians until we achieved data saturation. RESULTS: We interviewed 10 patients and 10 clinicians. Most patients (70%) were male, and the mean age was 57±16 years. Clinicians included attending surgeons, residents, nurse practitioners, nurses, and case managers. Three themes emerged. (1) Communication (patient-clinician and clinician-clinician): clinicians understood that the discharge process malfunctions when communication with patients is not clear. Many patients discussed confusion about their discharge plan. Clinicians lamented that poorly written discharge summaries are an inadequate means of communication between inpatient and outpatient clinicians. (2) Discharge teaching and written instructions: patients appreciated discharge teaching but found written discharge instructions to be overwhelming and unhelpful. Clinicians preferred spending more time teaching patients and understood that written instructions contain too much jargon. (3) Outpatient care coordination: patients and clinicians identified difficulties with coordinating ongoing outpatient care. Both identified the patient's primary care physician and insurance coverage as important determinants of the outpatient experience. CONCLUSION: TACS patients face numerous challenges at hospitalization discharge. Clinicians struggle to effectively help their patients with this stressful transition. Future interventions should focus on improving communication with patients, active communication with a patient's primary care physician, repurposing, and standardizing the discharge summary to serve primarily as a means of care coordination, and assisting the patient with navigating the transition. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III-descriptive, exploratory study.

Mechanism of injury and special considerations as predictive of serious injury: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's field triage guidelines (FTG) are routinely used by emergency medical services personnel for triaging injured patients. The most recent (2011) FTG contains physiologic, anatomic, mechanism, and special consideration steps. Our objective was to systematically review the criteria in the mechanism and special consideration steps that might be predictive of serious injury or need for a trauma center. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the predictive utility of mechanism and special consideration criteria for predicting serious injury. A research librarian searched in Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane databases for studies published between January 2011 and February 2021. Eligible studies were identified using a priori inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies were excluded if they lacked an outcome for serious injury, such as measures of resource use, injury severity scores, mortality, or composite measures using a combination of outcomes. Given the heterogeneity in populations, measures, and outcomes, results were synthesized qualitatively focusing on positive likelihood ratios (LR+) whenever these could be calculated from presented data or adjusted odds ratios (aOR). RESULTS: We reviewed 2418 abstracts and 315 full-text publications and identified 42 relevant studies. The factors most predictive of serious injury across multiple studies were death in the same vehicle (LR+ 2.2-7.4), ejection (aOR 3.2-266.2), extrication (LR+ 1.1-6.6), lack of seat belt use (aOR 4.4-11.3), high speeds (aOR 2.0-2.9), concerning crash variables identified by vehicle telemetry systems (LR+ 4.7-22.2), falls from height (LR+ 2.4-5.9), and axial load or diving (aOR 2.5-17.6). Minor or inconsistent predictors of serious injury were vehicle intrusion (LR+ 0.8-7.2), cardiopulmonary or neurologic comorbidities (LR+ 0.8-3.1), older age (LR+ 0.6-6.8), or anticoagulant use (LR+ 1.1-1.8). CONCLUSIONS: Select mechanism and special consideration criteria contribute positively to appropriate field triage of potentially injured patients.

Does mechanism of injury predict trauma center need?

OBJECTIVE: To determine the predictive value of the mechanism-of-injury step of the American College of Surgeons Field Triage Decision Scheme for determining trauma center need. METHODS: Emergency medical services (EMS) providers caring for injured adult patients transported to the regional trauma center in three midsized communities over two years were interviewed upon emergency department (ED) arrival. Included was any injured patient, regardless of injury severity. The interview collected patient physiologic condition, apparent anatomic injury, and mechanism of injury. Using the 1999 Scheme, patients who met the physiologic or anatomic steps were excluded. Patients were considered to need a trauma center if they had nonorthopedic surgery within 24 hours, had intensive care unit admission, or died prior to hospital discharge. Data were analyzed by calculating positive likelihood ratios (+LRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each mechanism-of-injury criterion. RESULTS: A total of 11,892 provider interviews were conducted. Of those, one was excluded because outcome data were not available, and 2,408 were excluded because they met the other steps of the Field Triage Decision Scheme. Of the remaining 9,483 cases, 2,363 met one of the mechanism-of-injury criteria, 204 (9%) of whom needed the resources of a trauma center. Criteria with a +LR ≥ 5 were death of another occupant in the same vehicle (6.8; CI: 2.7-16.7), fall >20 feet (5.3; CI: 2.4-11.4), and motor vehicle crash (MVC) extrication time >20 minutes (5.1; CI: 3.2-8.1). Criteria with a +LR between >2 and <5 were intrusion >12 inches (4.2; CI: 2.9-5.9), ejection (3.2; CI: 1.3-8.2), and deformity >20 inches (2.5; CI: 1.9-3.2). The criteria with a +LR ≤ 2 were MVC speed >40 mph (2.0; CI: 1.7-2.4), pedestrian/bicyclist struck at a speed >5 mph (1.2; CI:1.1-1.4), bicyclist/pedestrian thrown or run over (1.2; CI: 0.9-1.6), motorcycle crash at a speed >20 mph (1.2; CI: 1.1-1.4), rider separated from motorcycle (1.0; CI: 0.9-1.2), and MVC rollover (1.0; CI: 0.7-1.5). CONCLUSION: Death of another occupant, fall distance, and extrication time were good predictors of trauma center need when a patient did not meet the anatomic or physiologic conditions. Intrusion, ejection, and vehicle deformity were moderate predictors. Key words: wounds and injury; triage; emergency medical services; emergency medical technicians; predictors; mechanism of injury; trauma center.

EMS Provider assessment of vehicle damage compared with assessment by a professional crash reconstructionist.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of emergency medical services (EMS) provider assessments of motor vehicle damage when compared with measurements made by a professional crash reconstructionist. METHODS: EMS providers caring for adult patients injured during a motor vehicle crash and transported to the regional trauma center in a midsized community were interviewed upon emergency department arrival. The interview collected provider estimates of crash mechanism of injury. For crashes that met a preset severity threshold, the vehicle's owner was asked to consent to having a crash reconstructionist assess the vehicle. The assessment included measuring intrusion and external automobile deformity. Vehicle damage was used to calculate change in velocity. Paired t-test, correlation, and kappa were used to compare EMS estimates and investigator-derived values. RESULTS: Ninety-one vehicles were enrolled; of these, 58 were inspected and 33 were excluded because the vehicle was not accessible. Six vehicles had multiple patients. Therefore, a total of 68 EMS estimates were compared with the inspection findings. Patients were 46% male, 28% were admitted to hospital, and 1% died. The mean EMS-estimated deformity was 18 inches and the mean measured deformity was 14 inches. The mean EMS-estimated intrusion was 5 inches and the mean measured intrusion was 4 inches. The EMS providers and the reconstructionist had 68% agreement for determination of external automobile deformity (kappa 0.26) and 88% agreement for determination of intrusion (kappa 0.27) when the 1999 American College of Surgeons Field Triage Decision Scheme criteria were applied. The mean (± standard deviation) EMS-estimated speed prior to the crash was 48 ± 13 mph and the mean reconstructionist-estimated change in velocity was 18 ± 12 mph (correlation -0.45). The EMS providers determined that 19 vehicles had rolled over, whereas the investigator identified 18 (kappa 0.96). In 55 cases, EMS and the investigator agreed on seat belt use; for the remaining 13 cases, there was disagreement (five) or the investigator was unable to make a determination (eight) (kappa 0.40). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that EMS providers are good at estimating rollover. Vehicle intrusion, deformity, and seat belt use appear to be more difficult for EMS to estimate, with only fair agreement with the crash reconstructionist. As expected, the EMS provider -estimated speed prior to the crash does not appear to be a reasonable proxy for change in velocity.

Comparison of the 1999 and 2006 trauma triage guidelines: where do patients go?

BACKGROUND: In 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a revised Field Triage Decision Scheme. It is unknown how this modified scheme will affect the number of patients identified by emergency medical services (EMS) for transport to a trauma center. OBJECTIVES: To determine the change in the number of patients transported by EMS who meet the 2006 scheme, compared with the 1999 scheme, and to determine how the scheme change would affect under- and overtriage rates. METHODS: The EMS providers in charge of care for injured adult patients transported to a regional trauma center in three mid-sized cities were interviewed immediately after completing transport. All injured patients were included, regardless of severity. The interview included patient demographics, vital signs, apparent anatomic injury, and the mechanism of injury. Included patients were then followed through hospital discharge. The 1999 and 2006 scheme criteria were each retrospectively applied to the collected data. The numbers of patients identified by the two schemes were determined. Patients were considered to have needed a trauma center if they had nonorthopedic surgery within 24 hours, were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU), or died. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics including 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: EMS interviews were conducted for 11,892 patients and outcome data were unavailable for one patient. The average patient age was 48 years; 51% of the patients were men. Providers reported bringing 54% of the enrolled patients to the trauma center based on their local trauma protocol. Medical record review identified 12% of the enrolled patients as needing a trauma center. Use of the 2006 scheme would have resulted in 1,423 fewer patients (12%; 95% confidence interval [CI]:11%-13%) being identified as needing a trauma center by EMS providers (40%; 95% CI: 39%-41% versus 28%; 95% CI: 27%-29%). Of those patients, 1,344 (94%) did not actually need the resources of a trauma center, whereas 78 (6%) actually needed the resources of a trauma center and would have been undertriaged. CONCLUSION: Use of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme would have resulted in a significant decrease in the number of patients identified as needing the resources of a trauma center. These changes reduced overtriage while causing a small increase in the number of patients who would have been undertriaged.

Premorbid statin use is associated with improved survival and functional outcomes in older head-injured individuals.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether preinjury statin use is associated with survival and functional recovery in older adult victims of moderate/severe head trauma. METHODS: Using the National Study of Costs and Outcomes of Trauma dataset compiled from 69 US hospitals, the effect of preinjury statin use was assessed for in-hospital mortality and functional outcome in patients aged ≥65 with head injury Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS)≥3. Individuals dying within 24 hours of admission or presenting with fixed dilated pupils were excluded. The Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale, dichotomized at the ability to return to premorbid major activity, was used to measure functional outcome. Multivariate regression modeled statin use and outcomes controlling for demographic, comorbidity, and injury characteristics. RESULTS: Of 523 eligible individuals, 117 (22%) used statins at the time of injury. Statin use was associated with a 76% lower adjusted risk of in-hospital death (relative risk [RR]=0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08-0.69). Of 395 individuals discharged alive, 303 survived 1 year and 264 had complete Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale scores. Statin users and nonusers demonstrated similar risk of good recovery at 3 months (RR=0.83; 95% CI, 0.46-1.49). At 12 months postinjury, statin users had 13% higher likelihood of good recovery (RR=1.13; 95% CI, 1.01-1.26). The presence of cardiovascular comorbidities abrogated this effect. CONCLUSION: Preinjury statin use in older adult traumatic brain injury victims is associated with reduced risk of death and improved functional recovery at 12 months postinjury. Individuals with cardiovascular comorbidities lose this benefit of premorbid statin use. Statins, as possible protective agents in head trauma, warrant further study.