No abstract

Despite major improvements in the United States trauma system over the past two decades, prehospital trauma triage is a significant challenge. Undertriage is associated with increased mortality, and overtriage results in significant resource overuse. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma benchmarks for undertriage and overtriage are not being met. Many barriers to appropriate field triage exist, including lack of a formal definition for major trauma, absence of a simple and widely applicable triage mode, and emergency medical service adherence to triage protocols. Modern trauma triage systems should ideally be based on the need for intervention rather than injury severity. Future studies should focus on identifying the ideal definition for major trauma and creating triage models that can be easily deployed. This narrative review article presents challenges and potential solutions for prehospital trauma triage.

BACKGROUND:Malnutrition is associated with increased morbidity and mortality after trauma. The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) is a validated scoring system used to predict the risk of complications related to malnutrition in nontrauma patients. We hypothesized that GNRI is predictive of worse outcomes in geriatric trauma patients. METHODS:This was a single-center retrospective study of trauma patients 65 years or older admitted in 2019. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index was calculated based on admission albumin level and ratio of actual body weight to ideal body weight. Groups were defined as major risk (GNRI <82), moderate risk (GNRI 82-91), low risk (GNRI 92-98), and no risk (GNRI >98). The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included ventilator days, intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, discharge home, sepsis, pneumonia, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the association between GNRI risk category and outcomes. RESULTS:A total of 513 patients were identified for analysis. Median age was 78 years (71-86 years); 24 patients (4.7%) were identified as major risk, 66 (12.9%) as moderate risk, 72 (14%) as low risk, and 351 (68.4%) as no risk. Injury Severity Scores and Charlson Comorbidity Indexes were similar between all groups. Patients in the no risk group had decreased rates of death, and after adjusting for Injury Severity Score, age, and Charlson Comorbidity Index, the no risk group had decreased odds of death (odds ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.41) compared with the major risk group. The no risk group also had fewer infectious complications including sepsis and pneumonia, and shorter hospital LOS and were more likely to be discharged home. CONCLUSIONS:Major GNRI risk is associated with increased mortality and infectious complications in geriatric trauma patients. Further studies should target interventional strategies for those at highest risk based on GNRI.

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRFs) to nonoperative management in severe chest wall injury. Background: SSRF has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with clinical flail chest and respiratory failure. However, the effect of SSRF outcomes in severe chest wall injuries without clinical flail chest is unknown. Methods: Randomized controlled trial comparing SSRF to nonoperative management in severe chest wall injury, defined as: (1) a radiographic flail segment without clinical flail or (2) ≥5 consecutive rib fractures or (3) any rib fracture with bicortical displacement. Randomization was stratified by the unit of admission as a proxy for injury severity. Primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, ventilator days, opioid exposure, mortality, and incidences of pneumonia and tracheostomy. Quality of life at 1, 3, and 6 months was measured using the EQ-5D-5L survey. Results: Eighty-four patients were randomized in an intention-to-treat analysis (usual care = 42, SSRF = 42). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The numbers of total fractures, displaced fractures, and segmental fractures per patient were also similar, as were the incidences of displaced fractures and radiographic flail segments. Hospital LOS was greater in the SSRF group. ICU LOS and ventilator days were similar. After adjusting for the stratification variable, hospital LOS remained greater in the SSRF group (RR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.17–1.88). ICU LOS (RR: 1.65, 95% CI: 0.94–2.92) and ventilator days (RR: 1.49, 95% CI: 0.61–-3.69) remained similar. Subgroup analysis showed that patients with displaced fractures were more likely to have LOS outcomes similar to their usual care counterparts. At 1 month, SSRF patients had greater impairment in mobility [3 (2–3) vs 2 (1–2), P = 0.012] and self-care [2 (1–2) vs 2 (2–3), P = 0.034] dimensions of the EQ-5D-5L. Conclusions: In severe chest wall injury, even in the absence of clinical flail chest, the majority of patients still reported moderate to extreme pain and impairment of usual physical activity at one month. SSRF increased hospital LOS and did not provide any quality of life benefit for up to 6 months.

No abstract

Transplant patients who received linezolid had a higher incidence of EOT thrombocytopenia and platelet transfusions, compared with NTP. Transplant patients who are thrombocytopenic at baseline are at the greatest risk. These findings may relate to more frequent use of drugs associated with marrow suppression or greater linezolid exposure in the TP cohort. Clinicians caring for transplant patients should take into account this higher risk of thrombocytopenia and need for platelets when considering use of linezolid in this population.

BACKGROUND:Older adult trauma is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Individuals older than 65 years are expected to make up more than 21% of the total population and almost 39% of trauma admissions by 2050. Our objective was to perform a national review of older adult trauma mortality and identify associated risk factors to highlight potential areas for improvement in quality of care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of the National Trauma Data Bank including all patients age ≥65 years with at least one International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification trauma code admitted to a Level I or II US trauma center between 2007 and 2015. Variables examined included demographics, comorbidities, emergency department vitals, injury characteristics, and trauma center characteristics. Multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression was performed to identify independent risk factors of in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: There were 1,492,759 patients included in this study. The number of older adult trauma patients increased from 88,056 in 2007 to 158,929 in 2015 ( p > 0.001). Adjusted in-hospital mortality decreased in 2014 to 2015 (odds ratio [OR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-0.91) when compared with 2007 to 2009. Admission to a university hospital was protective (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.93) as compared with a community hospital admission. There was no difference in mortality risk between Level II and Level I admission (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.92-1.08). The strongest trauma-related risk factor for in-patient mortality was pancreas/bowel injury (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 2.04-2.49). CONCLUSION:Mortality in older trauma patients is decreasing over time, indicating an improvement in the quality of trauma care. The outcomes of university based hospitals can be used as national benchmarks to guide quality metrics.

No abstract