Role of Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment in Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Is Universal Consultation Required?

INTRODUCTION: Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) or concussion is prevalent among trauma patients, but symptoms vary. Assessing discharge safety is not standardized. At our institution, occupational therapy (OT) performs cognitive assessments for mTBI to determine discharge readiness, potentially increasing resource utilization. We aimed to describe characteristics and outcomes in mTBI trauma patients and hypothesized that OT consultation was associated with increased length of stay (LOS). METHODS: This is a retrospective study at a level 1 trauma center over 17 mo. All patients with mTBI, without significant concomitant injuries, were included. We collected data regarding OT assessment, LOS, mechanism of injury, Glasgow coma score, injury severity score (ISS), concussion symptoms, and patient disposition. Statistical analysis was performed, and significance was determined when P < 0.05. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty three patients were included. Median LOS was 1 d and ISS 5. Ninety percent were discharged home. The most common presenting symptom was loss of consciousness (85%). No symptoms were associated with differences in LOS or discharge disposition (P > 0.05). OT consult (n = 114, 49%) was associated with longer LOS and higher ISS (P < 0.01). Representation with concussive symptoms, discharge disposition, mechanism of injury, and patient demographics were no different regardless of OT consultation (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: mTBI is common and assessment for discharge safety is not standardized. OT cognitive assessment was associated with longer LOS and higher injury severity. Despite institutional culture, OT consultation was variable and not associated with improved concussion-related outcomes. Our data suggest that OT is not required for mTBI discharge readiness assessment. To improve resource utilization, more selective OT consultation should be considered. Further prospective data are needed to identify which patients would most benefit.

Resuscitation and Evaluation With Intraosseous Access: A Review of the Literature in Trauma and Non-Trauma Patients.

According to trauma resuscitation guidelines, intraosseous (IO) access is appropriate when failure to gain intravenous (IV) access is present in trauma, burn, shock, or resuscitation settings for adults or when two failed attempts have been made in the resuscitation of a pediatric patient. However, their effectiveness and use have been debated due to concerns on flow rates, extravasation, compartment syndrome, and osteomyelitis. The objective of this review is to examine the current literature regarding intraosseous access in trauma resuscitation, focusing on interventions and complication rates.

Firearm Injury, It's Not Just Physical: The Adverse Impact on Patient-Reported Socioeconomic, Mental Health, and Quality-of-Life Outcomes.

Background: The burden of firearm injury (FI) extends beyond hospitalization; however, literature focuses mostly on short-term physical outcomes. This study aimed to assess changes in patient-reported outcomes following firearm-related trauma. We hypothesized long-term patient-reported socioeconomic, mental health, and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes are worse post-FI compared to pre-FI.Methods: This was a retrospective study where a phone survey was conducted with FI survivors admitted between January 2017 and August 2022 at a level 1 trauma center. Survey questions assessed demographics, socioeconomics, and mental and physical health pre-FI vs ≥ 6 months post-FI; the McNemar test was used for comparisons. The PROMIS-29 + 2v2.1 NIH validated instrument was used to assess long-term QoL. Standardized NIH PROMIS T-scores were calculated using the HealthMeasures Scoring Service.Results: Of 204 eligible FI survivors, 71 were successfully contacted and 38 surveyed. Respondents were male (86.8%), Black (76%), and aged 18-29 (55.3%), and 68.4% had high school level education. Post-FI, patients were more likely to be unemployed (55.2% vs 13.2%, P < .001) and report increased mental health needs (84.2% vs 21%, P < .001) compared to pre-FI. Most (73.7%) also reported lasting physical disability. Similarly, the PROMIS instrument demonstrated largely worse health-related QoL scores post-FI, particularly high anxiety/fear (T-score 60.2, SE 3.1, CI 54.6-66.3, Table 2), pain resulting in life interference (T-score 60.0, SE 2.3, CI 55.7-63.9), and worse physical function (T-score 42.5, SE 3.0, CI 38.2-46.9).Conclusions: Firearm injury survivors had more unemployment and worse mental health post-FI compared to pre-FI. Firearm injury survivors also reported significantly worse health-related QoL metrics including pain, anxiety, and physical function 6 months following their trauma. These long-term patient-reported outcomes are a framework to build future outpatient resources.Level of Evidence: IV.

The impact of post-operative enteral nutrition on duodenal injury outcomes: A post hoc analysis of an EAST multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Leak following surgical repair of traumatic duodenal injuries results in prolonged hospitalization and oftentimes nil per os(NPO) treatment. Parenteral nutrition(PN) has known morbidity; however, duodenal leak(DL) patients often have complex injuries and hospital courses resulting in barriers to enteral nutrition(EN). We hypothesized EN alone would be associated with 1)shorter duration until leak closure and 2)less infectious complications and shorter hospital length of stay(HLOS) compared to PN. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of a retrospective, multicenter study from 35 Level-1 trauma centers, including patients >14 years-old who underwent surgery for duodenal injuries(1/2010-12/2020) and endured post-operative DL. The study compared nutrition strategies: EN vs PN vs EN + PN using Chi-Square and Kruskal-Wallis tests; if significance was found pairwise comparison or Dunn's test were performed. RESULTS: There were 113 patients with DL: 43 EN, 22 PN, and 48 EN + PN. Patients were young(median age 28 years-old) males(83.2%) with penetrating injuries(81.4%). There was no difference in injury severity or critical illness among the groups, however there were more pancreatic injuries among PN groups. EN patients had less days NPO compared to both PN groups(12 days[IQR23] vs 40[54] vs 33[32],p = <0.001). Time until leak closure was less in EN patients when comparing the three groups(7 days[IQR14.5] vs 15[20.5] vs 25.5[55.8],p = 0.008). EN patients had less intra-abdominal abscesses, bacteremia, and days with drains than the PN groups(all p < 0.05). HLOS was shorter among EN patients vs both PN groups(27 days[24] vs 44[62] vs 45[31],p = 0.001). When controlling for predictors of leak, regression analysis demonstrated EN was associated with shorter HLOS(ß -24.9, 95%CI -39.0 to -10.7,p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: EN was associated with a shorter duration until leak closure, less infectious complications, and shorter length of stay. Contrary to some conventional thought, PN was not associated with decreased time until leak closure. We therefore suggest EN should be the preferred choice of nutrition in patients with duodenal leaks whenever feasible. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.