scholarly journals P0213 / #2008: THE EPIDEMIOLOGY OF PEDIATRIC POLYTRAUMA AND ORTHOPEDIC INJURIES: 12-YEAR ANALYSIS OF A LEVEL-1 TRAUMA CENTER (2007-2019)

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement 1 3S) ◽  
pp. 129-129
Author(s):  
M. Castelão ◽  
J. Pedro ◽  
G. Lopes
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 215145932097267
Author(s):  
Jonathan D. Haskel ◽  
Charles C. Lin ◽  
Daniel J. Kaplan ◽  
John F. Dankert ◽  
David Merkow ◽  
...  

Purpose: To characterize the volume and variation in orthopedic consults and surgeries that took place during a period of social distancing and pandemic. Methods: All orthopedic consults and surgeries at an urban level 1 trauma center from 3/22/20-4/30/2020 were retrospectively reviewed (the social distancing period). Data from the same dates in 2019 were reviewed for comparison. Age, gender, Score for Trauma Triage in the Geriatric and Middle Aged (STTGMA) score and injury type were queried. Operating room data collected included: type of surgery performed, inpatient or outpatient status, and if the cases were categorized as elective, trauma or infectious cases. Results: Compared to 2019, there was a 48.3% decrease in consult volume in 2020. The 2020 population was significantly older (44.0 vs 52.6 years-old, p = 0.001) and more male (65% vs 35%, p = 0.021). There were 23 COVID positive patients, 10 of which died within the collection period. Consult distribution dramatically changed, with decreases in ankle fractures, distal radius fractures and proximal humerus fractures of 76.5%, 77.4% and 55.0%, respectively. However, there was no significant difference in volume of hip, tibial shaft and femoral shaft fractures (p > 0.05). In 2020, there was a 41.4% decrease in operating room volume, no elective cases were performed, and cases were primarily trauma related. Conclusions: During a period of pandemic and social distancing, the overall volume of orthopedic consults and surgeries significantly declined. However, hip fracture volume remained unchanged. Patients presenting with orthopedic injuries were older, and at higher risk for inpatient mortality.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlie A. Sewalt ◽  
Benjamin Y. Gravesteijn ◽  
Daan Nieboer ◽  
Ewout W. Steyerberg ◽  
Dennis Den Hartog ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Prehospital triage protocols typically try to select patients with Injury Severity Score (ISS) above 15 for direct transportation to a Level-1 trauma center. However, ISS does not necessarily discriminate between patients who benefit from immediate care at Level-1 trauma centers. The aim of this study was to assess which patients benefit from direct transportation to Level-1 trauma centers. Methods We used the American National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB), a retrospective observational cohort. All adult patients (ISS > 3) between 2015 and 2016 were included. Patients who were self-presenting or had isolated limb injury were excluded. We used logistic regression to assess the association of direct transportation to Level-1 trauma centers with in-hospital mortality adjusted for clinically relevant confounders. We used this model to define benefit as predicted probability of mortality associated with transportation to a non-Level-1 trauma center minus predicted probability associated with transportation to a Level-1 trauma center. We used a threshold of 1% as absolute benefit. Potential interaction terms with transportation to Level-1 trauma centers were included in a penalized logistic regression model to study which patients benefit. Results We included 388,845 trauma patients from 232 Level-1 centers and 429 Level-2/3 centers. A small beneficial effect was found for direct transportation to Level-1 trauma centers (adjusted Odds Ratio: 0.96, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.92–0.99) which disappeared when comparing Level-1 and 2 versus Level-3 trauma centers. In the risk approach, predicted benefit ranged between 0 and 1%. When allowing for interactions, 7% of the patients (n = 27,753) had more than 1% absolute benefit from direct transportation to Level-1 trauma centers. These patients had higher AIS Head and Thorax scores, lower GCS and lower SBP. A quarter of the patients with ISS > 15 were predicted to benefit from transportation to Level-1 centers (n = 26,522, 22%). Conclusions Benefit of transportation to a Level-1 trauma centers is quite heterogeneous across patients and the difference between Level-1 and Level-2 trauma centers is small. In particular, patients with head injury and signs of shock may benefit from care in a Level-1 trauma center. Future prehospital triage models should incorporate more complete risk profiles.


1992 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. 80
Author(s):  
Edward T. Rupert ◽  
J. Duncan Harviel ◽  
Grace S. Rozycki ◽  
Howard R. Champion

2012 ◽  
Vol 68 (5) ◽  
pp. 461-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine S. Roden ◽  
Winnie Tong ◽  
Matthew Surrusco ◽  
William W. Shockley ◽  
John A. Van Aalst ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin Powers Kinney ◽  
Kamal Gursahani ◽  
Eric Armbrecht ◽  
Preeti Dalawari

Objective: Previous studies looking at emergency department (ED) crowding and delays of care on outcome measures for certain medical and surgical patients excluded trauma patients. The objectives of this study were to assess the relationship of trauma patients’ ED length of stay (EDLOS) on hospital length of stay (HLOS) and on mortality; and to examine the association of ED and hospital capacity on EDLOS.Methods: This was a retrospective database review of Level 1 and 2 trauma patients at a single site Level 1 Trauma Center in the Midwest over a one year period. Out of a sample of 1,492, there were 1,207 patients in the analysis after exclusions. The main outcome was the difference in hospital mortality by EDLOS group (short was less than 4 hours vs. long, greater than 4 hours). HLOS was compared by EDLOS group, stratified by Trauma Injury Severity Score (TRISS) category (< 0.5, 0.51-0.89, > 0.9) to describe the association between ED and hospital capacity on EDLOS.Results: There was no significant difference in mortality by EDLOS (4.8% short and 4% long, p = .5). There was no significant difference in HLOS between EDLOS, when adjusted for TRISS. ED census did not affect EDLOS (p = .59), however; EDLOS was longer when the percentage of staffed hospital beds available was lower (p < .001).Conclusions: While hospital overcrowding did increase EDLOS, there was no association between EDLOS and mortality or HLOS in leveled trauma patients at this institution.


2016 ◽  
Vol 181 (5) ◽  
pp. 459-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vilas Saldanha ◽  
Fia Yi ◽  
Jeffrey D. Lewis ◽  
Nichole K. Ingalls

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document