Background Concerns of contracting the highly contagious disease COVID-19 have led to a reluctance in seeking medical attention, which may contribute to delayed hospital arrival among traumatic patients. The study objective was to describe differences in time from injury to arrival for patients with traumatic hip fractures admitted during the pandemic to pre-pandemic patients. Materials and methods This retrospective cohort study at six level I trauma centers included patients with traumatic hip fractures. Patients with a non-fall mechanism and those who were transferred in were excluded. Patients admitted 16 March 2019–30 June 2019 were in the “pre-pandemic” group, patients were admitted 16 March 2020–30 June 2020 were in the “pandemic” group. The primary outcome was time from injury to arrival. Secondary outcomes were time from arrival to surgical intervention, hospital length of stay (HLOS), and mortality. Results There were 703 patients, 352 (50.1%) pre-pandemic and 351 (49.9%) during the pandemic. Overall, 66.5% were female and the median age was 82 years old. Patients were similar in age, race, gender, and injury severity score. The median time from injury to hospital arrival was statistically shorter for pre-pandemic patients when compared to pandemic patients, 79.5 (56, 194.5) min vs. 91 (59, 420), p = 0.04. The time from arrival to surgical intervention (p = 0.64) was statistically similar between groups. For both groups, the median HLOS was 5 days, p = 0.45. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher during the pandemic, 1.1% vs 3.4%, p = 0.04. Conclusions While time from injury to hospital arrival was statistically longer during the pandemic, the difference may not be clinically important. Time from arrival to surgical intervention remained similar, despite changes made to prevent COVID-19 transmission.

BackgroundMortality from hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures remains high. Guidelines offer varying care approaches including the use of pelvic packing (PP), which was recently adopted for potential control of bleeding for this condition. However, the implementation of PP is uncertain as the debate on the optimal resuscitation strategy, angioembolization or PP continues. The study was designed to assess current practices among level 1 trauma centers in the US in regard to PP treatment for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was created to assess when to apply PP, application approach, and the respondent’s anecdotal perception on safety and effectiveness. Trauma Medical Directors at 158 US level 1 trauma centers were sent biweekly email invitations for 3 months. Participants were allowed to skip questions for any reason. The study hypothesis was that PP practices vary by US census bureau region, annual trauma admissions, and length of time in years since each trauma center received their respective level 1 trauma center designation.ResultsTwenty-five percent (40/158) of trauma medical directors participated and 75% (118/158) of the trauma medical directors did not participate. Of those who took the survey, 36/40 (90%) completed the survey and 4/40 (10%) partially completed the survey. Only 36 trauma medical directors responded on their perception of safety and effectiveness; 72% (26/36) of participants perceived PP as safe, whereas only a third (12/36) of participants perceived PP as effective. There were 25 trauma medical directors who provided the sequence of treatment modalities utilized at their level 1 trauma center, 76% (19/25) of participants reported that PP is utilized as the third or fourth priority. None of the participating level 1 trauma centers reported a preference towards utilization of PP as the first priority treatment. Half of the participants reported a preference towards applying PP only as a last resort to control hemorrhage. Northeastern and Western level 1 trauma centers were significantly more likely than Midwestern and Southern level 1 trauma centers to have reported application of PP to all hemodynamically unstable patients (p = 0.05). Midwestern, Southern, and Western level 1 trauma centers were significantly more likely to have perceived PP as safe than Northeastern level 1 trauma centers (p = 0.04). All low-volume and 38% high-volume level 1 trauma centers perceived PP to increase infection risks, (p = 0.03). We observed no association between the length of time each trauma center was designated a level 1 trauma center, and all participant responses.ConclusionControversy and varying anecdotal perception regarding safety and effectiveness of PP prevails among trauma medical directors at level 1 trauma centers in the US.

Objective: Hip fracture surgery in geriatric patients on anticoagulants may increase the risk for blood loss. Anticoagulation reversal may lower these risks; however, data on blood loss and transfusions are limited. The study purpose was to compare outcomes between hip fracture patients 1) not on anticoagulants 2) whose anticoagulants were reversed, and 3) whose anticoagulants were not reversed. Methods: This four-year retrospective cohort study at six Level 1 Trauma Centers enrolled geriatric patients (!65) with isolated hip fractures. The primary outcome was total hospital blood loss (ml). Secondary outcomes: hospital length of stay (HLOS) and volume of packed red blood cells (pRBC) transfusions (ml). Statistical analyses included: Fisher's, chi-squared, Kruskal-Wallis, linear mixed-effect and logistic regression. Bonferroni adjusted alpha ¼ 0.025. Results: Of the 459 patients, 189 (41%) were not on anticoagulants, 186 (41%) were reversed, and 84 (18%) were not reversed. The LS mean (SE) blood loss was 134 ml (12) for not reversed patients and 159 (17) for reversed patients; no significant difference compared to those not on anticoagulants [138 (12)], pdiff ¼ 0.14 and 0.83, respectively. The LS mean (SE) HLOS was significantly longer for the reversed patients, 7.7 (0.4) days, when compared to those not on anticoagulants, 6.8 (0.4), p ¼ 0.02, and when compared to those not reversed, 6.3 (0.6), p ¼ 0.01. There was no significant difference in pRBC transfusions. Conclusion: Not reversing anticoagulants for geriatric hip fractures was not associated with increased volume of blood loss or transfusions when compared to those reversed. Delayed surgery for anticoagulant reversal may be unnecessary and contributing to an increased HLOS.

BackgroundResuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is not widely adopted for pelvic fracture management. Western Trauma Association recommends REBOA for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures, whereas Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma and Advanced Trauma Life Support do not.MethodUtilizing a prospective cross-sectional survey, all 158 trauma medical directors at American College of Surgeons-verified Level I trauma centers were emailed survey invitations. The study aimed to determine the rate of REBOA use, REBOA indicators, and the treatment sequence of REBOA for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures.ResultsOf those invited, 25% (40/158) participated and 90% (36/40) completed the survey. Nearly half of trauma centers [42% (15/36)] use REBOA for pelvic fracture management. All participants included hemodynamic instability as an indicator for REBOA placement in pelvic fractures. In addition to hemodynamic instability, 29% (4/14) stated REBOA is used for patients who are ineligible for angioembolization, 14% (2/14) use REBOA when interventional radiology is unavailable, 7% (1/14) use REBOA for patients with a negative FAST. Fifty percent (7/14) responded that hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures exclusively indicates REBOA placement. Hemodynamic instability for pelvic fractures was most commonly defined as systolic blood pressure of < 90 [56% (20/36)]. At centers using REBOA, REBOA was the first line of treatment for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures 40% (6/15) of the time.ConclusionsThere is little consensus on REBOA use for pelvic fractures at US Level I Trauma Centers, except that hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures consistently indicated REBOA use.

Background Patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures have high mortality due to delayed hemorrhage control. We hypothesized that the availability of interventional radiology (IR) for angioembolization may vary in spite of the mandated coverage at US Level I trauma centers, and that the priority treatment sequence would depend on IR availability. Methods This survey was designed to investigate IR availability and pelvic fracture management practices. Six email invitations were sent to 158 trauma medical directors at Level I trauma centers. Participants were allowed to skip questions and irrelevant questions were skipped; therefore, not all questions were answered by all participants. The primary outcome was the priority treatment sequence for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures. Predictor variables were arrival times for IR when working off-site and intervention preparation times. Kruskal-Wallis and ordinal logistic regression were used; alpha = 0.05. Results Forty of the 158 trauma medical directors responded to the survey (response rate: 25.3%). Roughly half of participants had 24-h on-site IR coverage, 24% (4/17) of participants reported an arrival time ≥ 31 min when IR was on-call. 46% (17/37) of participants reported an IR procedure setup time of 31–120 min. Arrival time when IR was working off-site, and intervention preparation time did not significantly affect the sequence priority of angioembolization for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures. Conclusions Trauma medical directors should review literature and guidelines on time to angioembolization, their arrival times for IR, and their procedural setup times for angioembolization to ensure utilization of angioembolization in an optimal sequence for patient survival.

Introduction: Longer prehospital times were associated with increased odds for survival in trauma patients. The purpose of this study was to determine how the COVID-19 pandemic affected emergency medical services (EMS) prehospital times for trauma patients. Methods: This retrospective cohort study compared trauma patients transported via EMS to six US level I trauma centers admitted 1/1/19-12/31/19 (2019) and 3/16/20-6/30/20 (COVID-19). Outcomes included: total EMS prehospital time (dispatch to hospital arrival), injury to dispatch time, response time (dispatch to scene arrival), onscene time (scene arrival to scene departure), and transportation time (scene departure to hospital arrival). Fisher's exact, chi-squared, or Kruskal-Wallis tests were used, alpha = 0.05. All times are presented as median (IQR) minutes. Results: There were 9400 trauma patients transported by EMS: 79% in 2019 and 21% during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients were similar in demographics and transportation mode. Emergency room deaths were also similar between 2019 and COVID-19 [0.6% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.13].There were no differences between 2019 and during COVID-19 for total EMS prehospital time [44 (33, 63) vs. 43 (33, 62), p = 0.12], time from injury to dispatch [16 (6, 55) vs. 16 (7, 77), p = 0.41], response time [7 (5, 12) for both groups, p = 0.27], or on-scene time [16 (12−22) vs. 17 (12,22), p = 0.31]. Compared to 2019, transportation time was significantly shorter during COVID-19 [18 (13, 28) vs. 17 (12, 26), p = 0.01]. Conclusion: The median transportation time for trauma patients was marginally significantly shorter during COVID-19; otherwise, EMS prehospital times were not significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

ObjectivesThe onset of the national stay-at-home orders accompanied by a surge in firearm sales has elevated the concerns of clinicians and public health authorities. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of the stay-at-home orders among gunshot wound (GSW) trauma admissions.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study at six level I trauma centers across four states. Patients admitted after the onset of COVID-19 restrictions (March 16, 2020–June 30, 2020) were compared with those admitted during the same period in 2019. We compared (1) rate of patients with GSW and (2) characteristics of patients with GSW, by period using Χ2 tests or Fisher’s exact tests, as appropriate.ResultsThere were 6996 trauma admissions across the study period; 3707 (53%) in 2019 and 3289 (47%) in 2020. From 2019 to 2020, there was a significant increase in GSW admissions (4% vs. 6%, p=0.001); 4 weeks specifically had significant increases (March 16–March 23: 4%, April 1–April 8: 5%, April 9–April 16: 6%, and May 11–May 18: 5%). Of the 334 GSWs, there were significant increases in patients with mental illness (5% vs. 11%, p=0.03), alcohol use disorder (2% vs. 10%, p=0.003), substance use disorder (11% vs. 25%, p=0.001), and a significant decrease in mortality (14% vs. 7%, p=0.03) in 2020. No other significant differences between time periods were identified.ConclusionOur data suggest that trauma centers admitted significantly more patients with GSW following the national guidelines, including an increase in those with mental illness and substance use-related disorders. This could be attributable to the stay-at-home orders.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective study.

As the demand for alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters ( AGP ) increases in food animal production, phytobiotic compounds gain popularity because of their ability to mimic the desirable bioactive properties of AGP. Chestnut tannins ( ChT ) are one of many phytobiotic compounds used as feed additives, particularly in South America, for broilers because of its favorable antimicrobial and growth promotion capabilities. Although studies have observed the microbiological and immunologic effects of ChT, there is a lack of studies evaluating the metabolic function of ChT. Therefore, the objective of this study was to characterize the cecal metabolic changes induced by ChT inclusion and how they relate to growth promotion. A total of 200 day-of-hatch broiler chicks were separated into 2 feed treatment groups: control and 1% ChT. The ceca from all the chicks in the treatment groups were collected on day 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 after hatch. The cytokine mRNA quantitative RT-PCR was determined using TaqMan gene expression assays for IL-1B, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, and interferon gamma quantification. The cytokine expression showed highly significant increased expressions of IL-6 and IL-10 on day 2 and 6, whereas the other proinflammatory cytokines did not have significantly increased expression. The results from the kinome array demonstrated that the ceca from birds fed with 1% ChT had significant ( P < 0.05) metabolic alterations based on the number of peptides when compared with the control group across all day tested. The increased expression of IL-6 appeared to be strongly indicative of altered metabolism, whereas the increased expression of IL-10 indicated the regulatory effect against other proinflammatory cytokines other than IL-6. The ChT initiate a metabolic mechanism during the first 10 d in the broiler. For the first time, we show that a phytobiotic product initially modulates metabolism while also potentially supporting growth and feed efficiency downstream. In conclusion, a metabolic phenotype alteration in the ceca of chickens fed ChT may indicate the importance of enhanced broiler gut health.