External signs of trauma: A poor predictor of injury in found down and ground level falls.

BACKGROUND: The significance of external signs (EST) and signs or symptoms of trauma (SS) after ground level falls or found down (GLF/FD) is unclear. We hypothesized that EST and SS were associated with injury. METHODS: Patients with GLF/FD were retrospectively studied. SS was defined as having any EST, tenderness, or subjective complaint. Outcomes were any significant finding (SF) and Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 8. Diagnostic accuracy of EST and SS were assessed with positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+, LR-). RESULTS: Of 578 patients, 66% and 95% had EST and SS respectively. For EST, LR+ and LR-were 1.14 and 0.76 (SF), and 1.21 and 0.64 (ISS>8). For SS, LR+ and LR-were 1.07 and 0.19 (SF), and 1.03 and 0.49 (ISS>8). CONCLUSION: EST lacked sufficient diagnostic accuracy for SF and ISS>8. Lack of SS was reasonably accurate in ruling out SF but not ISS>8. Triage utilizing EST alone for GLF/FD is not useful.

Fall downs should not fall out: Blunt cerebrovascular injury in geriatric patients after low-energy trauma is common.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data examining the impact of screening for blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) in the geriatric population sustaining falls. We hypothesize that BCVI screening in this cohort would rarely identify injuries that would change management. METHODS: A retrospective study (2012-2016) identified patients 65 years or older with Abbreviated Injury Scores for the head and neck region or face region of 1 or greater after falls of 5 ft or less. Patients who met the expanded Denver criteria for BCVI screening were included for analysis. Outcomes were change in management (defined as the initiation of medical, surgical or endovascular therapy for BCVI), stroke attributable to BCVI, in-hospital mortality and acute kidney injury. Univariate analysis was performed where appropriate. A p value less than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Of 997 patients, 257 (26%) met criteria for BCVI screening after exclusions. The BCVI screening occurred in 100 (39%), using computed tomographic angiography for screening in 85% of patients. Patients who were not screened (n = 157) were more likely to be on preinjury antithrombotic drugs and to have worse renal function compared with the screened group. There were 23 (23%) BCVIs diagnosed in the screened group while one (0.7%) in the nonscreened group had a delayed diagnosis of BCVI. Of the 24 patients with BCVI, 15 (63%) had a change in management, consisting of the initiation of antiplatelet therapy. Comparing the screened to the nonscreened groups, 14% versus 0.7% (p < 0.0001) had a change in management. The screened group had a higher 30-day stroke rate (7% vs. 1%, p = 0.03) but there were no differences in the stroke rate attributable to BCVI (1% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.99), mortality (6% vs. 8%, p = 0.31) or acute kidney injury (5% vs. 6%, p = 0.40). CONCLUSION: In geriatric patients with low-energy falls meeting criteria for BCVI screening, BCVIs were commonly diagnosed when screened, and the majority of those with BCVI had a change in management. These findings support BCVI screening in this geriatric cohort. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management, level IV.

Do simple beside lung function tests predict morbidity after rib fractures?

BACKGROUND: We evaluated if incentive spirometry volume (ISV) and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) could predict acute respiratory failure (ARF) in patients with rib fractures. METHODS: Normotensive, co-operative patients were enrolled prospectively. ISV and PEFR were measured on admission, at 24 h and at 48 h by taking the best of three readings each time. The primary outcome, ARF, was defined as requiring invasive or noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. RESULTS: 99 patients were enrolled (median age, 77 years). ARF occurred in 9%. Of the lung function tests, only a low median ISV at admission was associated with ARF (500 ml vs 1250 ml, p = 0.04). Three of 69 patients with ISV of ≥1000 ml versus six of 30 with ISV <1000 ml developed ARF (p = 0.01). Other significant factors were: number of rib fractures, tube thoracostomy, any lower-third rib fracture, flail segment. CONCLUSION: PEFR did not predict ARF. Admission ISV may have value in predicting ARF.