Background In France, the pre-hospital field triage of trauma patients is currently based on the Vittel criteria algorithm. This algorithm was originally created in 2002 before the stratification of trauma centers and, at the national level, has not been revised since. This could be responsible for the overtriage of trauma patients in Level I Trauma Centers. The principal aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between each Vittel field triage criterion and trauma patients’ Injury Severity Score. Methods Our Level I Trauma Center receives an average of 300 trauma patients per year. Demographic and physiological data, along with the entire trauma patient management process and Vittel field triage criteria, are recorded in a local trauma registry. The Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) and Injury Severity Score (ISS) are calculated after a complete assessment of the trauma victim during their in-hospital management. Results were concerned with the presence of an ISS of greater than 15, which defined a major trauma patient; mortality within 30 days; and admission to the intensive care unit. This study is a registry analysis from January 2013 to September 2017. Results Of the 1373 patients in the registry, 1151 were included in the analysis with a mean age of 43 years (± 19) and a median ISS of 13 (IQR = 5–22), where 887 (77%) were male. Nine of the 24 Vittel criteria were associated with an ISS > 15. In a multivariate analysis, no criterion related to kinetic elements was significantly correlated with an ISS > 15, mortality within 30 days, or admission to intensive care. Three algorithm categories were predictive of a major trauma patient (ISS > 15): physiological variables, pre-hospital resuscitation, and physical injuries, while kinetic elements were not. Conclusions Criteria related to physiological variables, pre-hospital resuscitation, and physical injuries are the most relevant to predicting the severity of a trauma patient’s condition. A revision of the VCA could potentially have beneficial effects on the over and undertriage phenomena, which constitute ongoing medical and financial concerns.
Drowning in fresh water was associated with deeper hypoxemia in the initial assessment. Despite this initial difference, latter respiratory and biological parameters or outcome were similar in both groups.
Background and objectives Haemorrhagic shock is a leading cause of avoidable mortality in prehospital care. For several years, our centre has followed a procedure of transfusing two units of packed red blood cells outside the hospital. Our study’s aim was twofold: describe the patient characteristics of those receiving prehospital blood transfusions and analyse risk factors for the 7‐day mortality rate. Materials and methods We performed a monocentric retrospective observational study. Demographic and physiological data were recovered from medical records. The primary outcome was mortality at seven days for all causes. All patients receiving prehospital blood transfusions between 2013 and 2018 were included. Results Out of 116 eligible patients, 56 patients received transfusions. Trauma patients (n = 18) were younger than medical patients (n = 38) (P = 0·012), had lower systolic blood pressure (P = 0·001) and had higher haemoglobin levels (P = 0·016). Mortality was higher in the trauma group than the medical group (P = 0·015). In‐hospital trauma patients received more fresh‐frozen plasma and platelet concentrate than medical patients (P < 0·05). Predictive factors of 7‐day mortality included transfusion for trauma‐related reasons, low Glasgow Coma Scale, low peripheral oxygen saturation, prehospital intensive resuscitation, existing coagulation disorders, acidosis and hyperlactataemia (P < 0·05). Conclusion Current guidelines recommend early transfusion in patients with haemorrhagic shock. Prehospital blood transfusions are safe. Coagulation disorders and acidosis remain a cause of premature death in patients with prehospital transfusions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.