Impact of lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic on number of patients and patterns of injuries at a level I trauma center

Summary Objective The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2) and its associated illness, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has led to a global health crisis burdening frontline emergency departments, including orthopedic and trauma units. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the impact of the lockdown secondary to the pandemic on patient numbers and pattern of injuries at the department of traumatology of the Medical University of Vienna. Methods This retrospective, descriptive study identified all patients admitted and enrolled onto the trauma registry at a level I trauma center, between 15 March 2020 and 30 April 2020 (lockdown) and compared them to those between 15 March 2019 and 30 April 2019 (baseline). Variables collected included patient age, sex, reason for hospital admission, place of injury, death, injury severity score (ISS), as well as American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score. Results A total of 10,938 patient visits to the trauma emergency department were analyzed, 8353 presentations during the baseline period and 2585 during lockdown. Only 1869 acutely injured and 716 follow-up patients presented during lockdown, compared to 6178 and 2175, respectively, during baseline. Throughout the COVID-19 lockdown there were significant reductions in both workplace and traffic accidents, sports injuries, number of hospitalized patients, and overall visits to the trauma emergency department; however, the number of major traumas and hip fractures remained similar. Furthermore, there was a significant increase in the frequency of injuries at home as well as hospital admissions due to attempted suicide. Conclusion Despite the reduction in total number of patients, trauma departments should continue to provide adequate service during lockdown considering that severe injuries showed no change. Conditions such as breakdown of social networks and limited access to mental health care and support might account for the significant rise in hospital admissions due to suicides. We recommend that more attention and effort should be made to prevent this excess of suicide deaths.

Download Full-text

Initial Approach to the Management of Multisystem Trauma

Mayo Clinic Critical and Neurocritical Care Board Review ◽

10.1093/med/9780190862923.003.0062 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 397-401

Author(s):

David S. Morris

Keyword(s):

Trauma Center ◽

Injury Severity ◽

Hospital Admissions ◽

The United States ◽

Emergency Department Visits ◽

Severely Injured ◽

Level Ii ◽

Level I ◽

Nonfatal Injuries ◽

Injured Patients

Nearly 200,000 people die of injury-related causes in the United States each year, and injury is the leading cause of death for all patients aged 1 to 44 years. Approximately 30 million people sustain nonfatal injuries each year, which results in about 29 million emergency department visits and 3 million hospital admissions. Management of severely injured patients, typically defined as having an Injury Severity Score greater than 15 is best managed in a level I or level II trauma center. Any physician who provides care for critically ill patients should have a basic familiarity with the fundamentals of trauma care.

Download Full-text

A Contemporary Analysis of the Effect of Trauma Center Verification Level on Mortality in Severe Injury

The American Surgeon ◽

10.1177/00031348211023437 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 000313482110234

Author(s):

David S. Plurad ◽

Glenn Geesman ◽

Nicholas W. Sheets ◽

Bhani Chawla-Kondal ◽

Napatakamon Ayutyanont ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Trauma Center ◽

Injury Severity ◽

Severely Injured ◽

Adult Age ◽

Program Participant ◽

Level Ii ◽

Level I ◽

Verification Process ◽

Injured Patients ◽

The Impact

Background Literature demonstrates increased mortality for the severely injured at a Level II vs. Level I center. Our objective is to reevaluate the impact of trauma center verification level on mortality for patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15 utilizing more contemporary data. We hypothesize that there would be no mortality discrepancy. Study Design Utilizing the ACS Trauma Quality Program Participant Use File admission year 2017, we identified severely injured (ISS >15) adult (age >15 years) patients treated at an ACS-verified Level I or Level II center. We excluded patients who underwent interfacility transfer. Logistic regression was performed to determine adjusted associations with mortality. Results There were 63 518 patients included, where 43 680 (68.8%) were treated at a Level I center and 19 838 (31.2%) at a Level II. Male gender (70.1%) and blunt injuries (92.0%) predominated. Level I admissions had a higher mean ISS [23.8 (±8.5) vs. 22.9 (±7.8), <.001], while Level II patients were older [mean age (y) 52.3 (±21.6) vs. 48.6 (±21.0), <.001] with multiple comorbidities (37.7% vs. 34.9%, <.001). Adjusted mortality between Level I and II centers was similar (12.0% vs. 11.8%, .570). Conclusions Despite previous findings, mortality outcomes are similar for severely injured patients treated at a Level I vs. Level II center. We theorize that this relates to mandated Level II resourcing as defined by an updated American College of Surgeons verification process.

Download Full-text

Motorcycle-related trauma: effects of age and site of injuries on mortality. A single-center, retrospective study.

10.21203/rs.2.22131/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Stefano Granieri ◽

Elisa Reitano ◽

Francesca Bindi ◽

Federica Renzi ◽

Fabrizio Sammartano ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Trauma Center ◽

Injury Severity ◽

Age Groups ◽

Mortality Rates ◽

Rank Test ◽

Younger Patients ◽

Risk Of Death ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Level I ◽

The Impact

Abstract BackgroundMotorcyclists are often victims of road traffic incidents. Though elderly patients seem to have worse survival outcomes and sustain more severe injuries than younger patients, concordance in the literature for this does not exist. The aim of the study is to evaluate the impact of age and injury severity on the mortality of patients undergoing motorcycle trauma. MethodsData of 1725 patients consecutively admitted to our Trauma Center were selected from 2002 to 2016 and retrospectively analyzed. The sample was divided into three age groups: ≤ 17 years, 18-54 years and ≥ 55 years. Mortality rates were analyzed for the overall population and patients with Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 25. Differences in survival among age groups were evaluated with Log-Rank test and multivariate logistic regression models were created to identify independent predictors of mortality.ResultsA lower survival rate was detected in patients older than 55 years (83,6% vs 94,7%; p = 0.049) and in those sustaining critical injuries (ISS ≥ 25, 61% vs 83% p = 0.021). Age (p =0,027; OR: 1,03), ISS (p <0,001; OR: 1,09), Revised Trauma Score (RTS) (p <0,001; OR: 0,47) resulted independent predictors of death. Multivariate analysis identified head (p <0,001; OR: 2,04), chest (p <0,001; OR: 1,54), abdominal (p <0,001; OR: 1,37) and pelvic (p =0,014; OR: 1,26) injuries as independent risk factors related to mortality as well. Compared to the theoretical probability of survival, patients of all age groups showed a survival advantage when managed at a level I Trauma Center.ConclusionsWe detected anatomical injury distributions and mortality rates among three age groups. Patients aging more than 55 years had an increased risk of death, with a prevalence of severe chest injuries, while younger patients sustained more severe head trauma. Age represented an independent predictor of death. Management of these patients at a Level I Trauma Center may lead to improved outcomes.

Download Full-text

The Impact of American College of Surgeons Trauma Center Designation and Outcomes after Early Thoracotomy: A National Trauma Databank Analysis

The American Surgeon ◽

10.1177/000313481207800123 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 78 (1) ◽

pp. 36-41 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Marko Bukur ◽

Bernardino Castelo Branco ◽

Kenji Inaba ◽

Ramon Cestero ◽

Leslie Kobayashi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Trauma Center ◽

Injury Severity ◽

Trauma Patients ◽

National Trauma ◽

Level Ii ◽

Pressure Time ◽

Significant Difference ◽

American College Of Surgeons ◽

Level I ◽

The Impact

Trauma centers are designated by the American College of Surgeons (ACS) into four different levels based on resources, volume, and scientific and educational commitment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between ACS center designation and outcomes after early thoracotomy for trauma. The National Trauma Databank (v. 7.0) was used to identify all patients who required early thoracotomy. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were extracted. Patients were categorized according to ACS trauma center designation. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the impact of ACS trauma center designation on mortality. From 2002 to 2006, 1834 (77.4%) patients were admitted to a Level I ACS verified trauma center, 474 (20.0%) to a Level II, and 59 (3.6%) to a Level III/IV facility. After adjusting for differences between the groups, there were no significant differences in mortality (overall: 53.3% for Level I, 63.1% for Level II, and 52.5% for Level III/IV, adjusted P = 0.417; or for patients arriving in cardiac arrest: 74.9% vs 87.1% vs 85.0%, P = 0.261). Subgroup analysis did not show any significant difference in survival irrespective of mechanism of injury. Glasgow Coma Scale score # 8, Injury Severity Score >16, no admission systolic blood pressure, time from admission to thoracotomy, and nonteaching hospitals were found to be independent predictors of death. For trauma patients who have sustained injuries requiring early thoracotomy, ACS trauma center designation did not significantly impact mortality. Nonteaching institutions however, were independently associated with poorer outcomes after early thoracotomy. These findings may have important implications in educational commitment of institutions. Further prospective evaluation of these findings is warranted.

Download Full-text

The Effect of Pharmacy-Driven Education on the Amount of Appropriately Administered Tetanus Vaccines in the Emergency Department

Hospital Pharmacy ◽

10.1177/0018578718769239 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 54 (1) ◽

pp. 45-50 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Meghan Fletcher ◽

Shannon Rankin ◽

Preeyaporn Sarangarm

Keyword(s):

Emergency Department ◽

Trauma Center ◽

Primary Outcome ◽

Historical Control ◽

Interventional Study ◽

Total Cost ◽

The Past ◽

Control And Prevention ◽

Level I ◽

The Impact

Background: Tetanus vaccinations for wound prophylaxis are routinely administered in emergency departments (ED). Current recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding tetanus administration for wound prophylaxis differentiate between the tetanus and diphtheria (Td) and the tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis (Tdap) formulations and when they should be administered. Lack of knowledge regarding these recommendations, different formulations, and techniques to locate patient immunization history can lend to increased duplicate and inappropriate vaccinations. Objective: The purpose of this prospective, interventional study with a historical control was to evaluate the impact of a pharmacy-driven education series on the proportion of duplicate and inappropriate tetanus vaccinations administered in a level I trauma center ED. Methods: Three months of tetanus vaccinations administered in the ED after this education were analyzed and compared with a historical control. The primary outcome is the percentage of vaccinations considered duplicates (previous vaccination within the past 5 years) when patients’ medical record was reviewed for immunization history. Secondary end points include the percentage of vaccinations considered nonadherent (according to current CDC-ACIP guidelines), the total cost of all duplicate vaccinations, and the percentage of vaccination orders that had the wrong formulation administered. Results: The percentage of duplicate vaccinations decreased from 9.9% (25 vaccinations) to 5.5% (14 vaccinations) (P = .067) from the preintervention group to the postintervention group. Nonadherent vaccinations compiled 3.6% versus 2.8% of the vaccinations (P = .611) and incorrect formulations given were 18.2% versus 11.4% (P = .176) in the preintervention and postintervention groups, respectively. Conclusion: The study suggests that multiple formulations of tetanus vaccinations and fragmented documentation of immunizations increase the prevalence of medication errors related to tetanus vaccinations. It also indicates that interventions more enduring than education are required to prevent these errors.

Download Full-text

Prehospital Intervals and In-Hospital Trauma Mortality: A Retrospective Study from a Level I Trauma Center

Prehospital and Disaster Medicine ◽

10.1017/s1049023x20000904 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 35 (5) ◽

pp. 508-515

Author(s):

Hassan Al-Thani ◽

Ahammed Mekkodathil ◽

Attila J. Hertelendy ◽

Tim Frazier ◽

Gregory R. Ciottone ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Trauma Center ◽

Injury Severity ◽

Road Traffic ◽

Trauma Patients ◽

Golden Hour ◽

Chest Injuries ◽

Life Saving ◽

Level I ◽

Prehospital Time ◽

The Impact

AbstractBackground:The increase in mortality and total prehospital time (TPT) seen in Qatar appear to be realistic. However, existing reports on the influence of TPT on mortality in trauma patients are conflicting. This study aimed to explore the impact of prehospital time on the in-hospital outcomes.Methods:A retrospective analysis of data on patients transferred alive by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and admitted to Hamad Trauma Center (HTC) of Hamad General Hospital (HGH; Doha, Qatar) from June 2017 through May 2018 was conducted. This study was centered on the National Trauma Registry database. Patients were categorized based on the trauma triage activation and prehospital intervals, and comparative analysis was performed.Results:A total of 1,455 patients were included, of which nearly one-quarter of patients required urgent and life-saving care at a trauma center (T1 activations). The overall TPT was 70 minutes and the on-scene time (OST) was 24 minutes. When compared to T2 activations, T1 patients were more likely to have been involved in road traffic injuries (RTIs); experienced head and chest injuries; presented with higher Injury Severity Score (ISS: median = 22); and had prolonged OST (27 minutes) and reduced TPT (65 minutes; P = .001). Prolonged OST was found to be associated with higher mortality in T1 patients, whereas TPT was not associated.Conclusions:In-hospital mortality was independent of TPT but associated with longer OST in severely injured patients. The survival benefit may extend beyond the golden hour and may depend on the injury characteristics, prehospital, and in-hospital settings.

Download Full-text

Motorcycle-related trauma: effects of age and site of injuries on mortality. A single-center, retrospective study.

10.21203/rs.2.22131/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Stefano Granieri ◽

Elisa Reitano ◽

Francesca Bindi ◽

Federica Renzi ◽

Fabrizio Sammartano ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Trauma Center ◽

Injury Severity ◽

Age Groups ◽

Mortality Rates ◽

Rank Test ◽

Younger Patients ◽

Risk Of Death ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Level I ◽

The Impact

Abstract Background Motorcyclists are often victims of road traffic incidents. Though elderly patients seem to have worse survival outcomes and sustain more severe injuries than younger patients, concordance in the literature for this does not exist. The aim of the study is to evaluate the impact of age and injury severity on the mortality of patients undergoing motorcycle trauma. Methods Data of 1725 patients consecutively admitted to our Trauma Center were selected from 2002 to 2016 and retrospectively analyzed. The sample was divided into three age groups: ≤ 17 years, 18-54 years and ≥ 55 years. Mortality rates were analyzed for the overall population and patients with Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 25. Differences in survival among age groups were evaluated with Log-Rank test and multivariate logistic regression models were created to identify independent predictors of mortality. Results A lower survival rate was detected in patients older than 55 years (83,6% vs 94,7%; p = 0.049) and in those sustaining critical injuries (ISS ≥ 25, 61% vs 83% p = 0.021). Age ( p =0,027; OR: 1,03), ISS ( p <0,001; OR: 1,09), Revised Trauma Score (RTS) ( p <0,001; OR: 0,47) resulted independent predictors of death. Multivariate analysis identified head ( p <0,001; OR: 2,04), chest ( p <0,001; OR: 1,54), abdominal ( p <0,001; OR: 1,37) and pelvic ( p =0,014; OR: 1,26) injuries as independent risk factors related to mortality as well. Compared to the theoretical probability of survival, patients of all age groups showed a survival advantage when managed at a level I Trauma Center. Conclusions We detected anatomical injury distributions and mortality rates among three age groups. Patients aging more than 55 years had an increased risk of death, with a prevalence of severe chest injuries, while younger patients sustained more severe head trauma. Age represented an independent predictor of death. Management of these patients at a Level I Trauma Center may lead to improved outcomes.

Download Full-text

Trauma System Overtriage: Are We on Track?

The American Surgeon ◽

10.1177/000313481408001011 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 80 (10) ◽

pp. 960-965 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Zoe Fullerton ◽

Graham W. Donald ◽

Henry G. Cryer ◽

Catherine E. Lewis ◽

Ali Cheaito ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Emergency Department ◽

Retrospective Study ◽

Trauma Center ◽

Injury Severity ◽

Trauma System ◽

Length Of Hospital Stay ◽

Optimal Care ◽

American College Of Surgeons ◽

Level I ◽

Trauma Activation

The American College of Surgeons (ACS) recommends trauma overtriage rate (OT) below 50 per cent to maximize efficiency while ensuring optimal care. This retrospective study was undertaken to evaluate OT rates in our Level I trauma center using the most recent criteria and guidelines. OT rates during a 12-month period were measured using six definitions based on combinations of Injury Severity Score (ISS), length of hospital stay (LOS, in days), procedures, and disposition after the emergency department. Reason for trauma activation was 55 per cent criteria, 16 per cent guidelines, 11 per cent paramedic judgment, five per cent no reason, and 13 per cent no documentation. OT rates ranged from 22.6 per cent (ISS less than 9, LOS 1 day or less, no consults) to 48.2 per cent (ISS less than 9, LOS 3 days or less, with procedures/consults) and were in compliance with ACS recommendations. Physiologic assessment criteria and anatomic injury had the lowest OT rates and contained all mortalities. Passenger space intrusion (PSI), pedestrian versus automobile (criterion and guideline), and extrication (guideline) all had consistently high rates of OT. We conclude that PSI should be reduced to a guideline, the pedestrian versus automobile criterion and guideline should be combined, and extrication could be removed from the triage scheme.

Download Full-text

Biomarkers-based personalized follow-up in chronic heart failure improves patient’s outcomes and reduces care associate cost

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes ◽

10.1186/s12955-021-01779-9 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Antonio Leon-Justel ◽

Jose I. Morgado Garcia-Polavieja ◽

Ana Isabel Alvarez-Rios ◽

Francisco Jose Caro Fernandez ◽

Pedro Agustin Pajaro Merino ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Heart Failure ◽

Hospital Admissions ◽

Left Ventricular ◽

Left Ventricular Ejection ◽

Secondary Outcome ◽

Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽

Number Of Patients ◽

Ed Visits ◽

The Impact

Abstract Background Heart failure (HF) is a major and growing medical and economic problem, with high prevalence and incidence rates worldwide. Cardiac Biomarker is emerging as a novel tool for improving management of patients with HF with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods This is a before and after interventional study, that assesses the impact of a personalized follow-up procedure for HF on patient’s outcomes and care associated cost, based on a clinical model of risk stratification and personalized management according to that risk. A total of 192 patients were enrolled and studied before the intervention and again after the intervention. The primary objective was the rate of readmissions, due to a HF. Secondary outcome compared the rate of ED visits and quality of life improvement assessed by the number of patients who had reduced NYHA score. A cost-analysis was also performed on these data. Results Admission rates significantly decreased by 19.8% after the intervention (from 30.2 to 10.4), the total hospital admissions were reduced by 32 (from 78 to 46) and the total length of stay was reduced by 7 days (from 15 to 9 days). The rate of ED visits was reduced by 44% (from 64 to 20). Thirty-one percent of patients had an improved functional class score after the intervention, whereas only 7.8% got worse. The overall cost saving associated with the intervention was € 72,769 per patient (from € 201,189 to € 128,420) and €139,717.65 for the whole group over 1 year. Conclusions A personalized follow-up of HF patients led to important outcome benefits and resulted in cost savings, mainly due to the reduction of patient hospitalization readmissions and a significant reduction of care-associated costs, suggesting that greater attention should be given to this high-risk cohort to minimize the risk of hospitalization readmissions.

Download Full-text

Impact of the first COVID-19 shutdown on patient volumes and surgical procedures of a Level I trauma center

European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery ◽

10.1007/s00068-021-01654-8 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Carolin A. Kreis ◽

Birte Ortmann ◽

Moritz Freistuehler ◽

René Hartensuer ◽

Hugo Van Aken ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Surgical Procedures ◽

Trauma Center ◽

Control Period ◽

Open Fractures ◽

Injury Patterns ◽

Emergency Patient ◽

Emergency Operations ◽

Incidence Proportion ◽

Level I ◽

The Impact

Abstract Purpose In Dec 2019, COVID-19 was first recognized and led to a worldwide pandemic. The German government implemented a shutdown in Mar 2020, affecting outpatient and hospital care. The aim of the present article was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 shutdown on patient volumes and surgical procedures of a Level I trauma center in Germany. Methods All emergency patients were recorded retrospectively during the shutdown and compared to a calendar-matched control period (CTRL). Total emergency patient contacts including trauma mechanisms, injury patterns and operation numbers were recorded including absolute numbers, incidence proportions and risk ratios. Results During the shutdown period, we observed a decrease of emergency patient cases (417) compared to CTRL (575), a decrease of elective cases (42 vs. 13) and of the total number of operations (397 vs. 325). Incidence proportions of emergency operations increased from 8.2 to 12.2% (shutdown) and elective surgical cases decreased (11.1 vs. 4.3%). As we observed a decrease for most trauma mechanisms and injury patterns, we found an increasing incidence proportion for severe open fractures. Household-related injuries were reported with an increasing incidence proportion from 26.8 to 47.5% (shutdown). We found an increasing tendency of trauma and injuries related to psychological disorders. Conclusion This analysis shows a decrease of total patient numbers in an emergency department of a Level I trauma center and a decrease of the total number of operations during the shutdown period. Concurrently, we observed an increase of severe open fractures and emergency operations. Furthermore, trauma mechanism changed with less traffic, work and sports-related accidents.

Download Full-text