Helmet use is associated with higher Injury Severity Scores in alpine skiers and snowboarders evaluated at a Level I trauma center

2019 ◽  
Vol 87 (5) ◽  
pp. 1205-1213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleah D. Porter ◽  
Spencer W. Trooboff ◽  
Madeleine G. Haff ◽  
James C. Cooros ◽  
Andrea B. Wolffing ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Center ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Helmet Use ◽  
Severity Scores ◽  
Alpine Skiers ◽  
Level I

scholarly journals Impact of Adapting the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS)-2005 from AIS-1998 on Injury Severity Scores and Clinical Outcome

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (24) ◽  
pp. 5033 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiun-Yuan Hsu ◽  
Shao-Chun Wu ◽  
Cheng-Shyuan Rau ◽  
Ting-Min Hsieh ◽  
Hang-Tsung Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Trauma Center ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Abbreviated Injury Scale ◽  
Body Regions ◽  
Severity Scores ◽  
Level I ◽  
Injured Patients ◽  
Head Neck

Background: In recent years, several versions of the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) were updated and published. It was reported that the codeset in the dictionary of AIS-2005 had significant change from that of AIS-1998. This study was designed to evaluate the potential impact of adapting the AIS-2005 codeset from the AIS-1998 in an established trauma system of a single level I trauma center. The patients’ outcome was measured in different Injury Severity Score (ISS) strata according to the double-coded injuries in a three-year period. Methods: The double-coded injuries sustained by 7520 trauma patients between 1 January, 2016, and 31 December, 2018, in a level I trauma center were used to compare the patient injury characteristics and outcomes between AIS-1998 and AIS-2005 and under different ISS strata, defined as <16 (mild to moderate injury), 16–24 (severe injury), and >24 (critical injury). Results: The mean ISS was significantly lower using AIS-2005 than using AIS-1998 (7.5 ± 6.3 vs. 8.3 ± 7.1, respectively, p < 0.001). AIS-2005 scores in the body regions of the head/neck (2.94 ± 1.08 vs. 3.40 ± 1.15, respectively, p < 0.001) and extremity (2.19 ± 0.56 vs. 2.24 ± 0.58, respectively, p < 0.001), but not in other body regions, were significantly lower than AIS-1998 scores. The critically injured patients (ISS >24), but not severely injured patients or patients with mild-to-moderate injury, coded by AIS-2005 had a significantly higher mortality rate (34.2% vs. 26.2%, respectively, p = 0.031) than did patients coded by AIS-1998. The rate of intensive care unit admission was significantly higher for patients in all ISS strata after adapting AIS-2005 as the scoring system than after adapting AIS-1998. Regarding patients with major trauma, which was defined as ISS > 15, the number of patients with major trauma in this study was 17.0% (n = 1276) for AIS-1998 and 9.7% (n = 733) for AIS-2005. As a consequence, the mortality rate of patients with major trauma was significantly higher in AIS-2005 than in AIS-1998 (15.4% vs. 9.1%, respectively, p < 000.1). Conclusions: In this study, we revealed that the adaptation of AIS-2005 from AIS-1998 had resulted in a significant decrease of severity scores in the measurement of the same injuries. The number of head/neck injuries classified as 16–24 was the key difference between AIS-1998 and AIS-2005. Furthermore, critically injured patients who had ISS > 24 coded by AIS-2005 had significantly higher mortality rates than did the patients coded by AIS-1998. This study also indicated that a direct comparison of the measurements that are generated from these two AIS versions can produce misleading results.

Association between Head Injury and Helmet Use in Alpine Skiers: Cohort Study from a Swiss Level I Trauma Center

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (8) ◽  
pp. 557-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik Baschera ◽  
Rebecca M. Hasler ◽  
David Taugwalder ◽  
Aristomenis Exadaktylos ◽  
Andreas Raabe
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Head Injury ◽  
Trauma Center ◽  
Helmet Use ◽  
Alpine Skiers ◽  
Level I

Analysis of Profit and Loss by Injury Severity over 20 Years at a University Level I Trauma Center

2016 ◽  
Vol 82 (7) ◽  
pp. 644-648
Author(s):  
Zachary Dietch ◽  
Jeffrey S. Young ◽  
Steven D. Young
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Center ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Positive Margin ◽  
Cost Data ◽  
Hospital Charges ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Average Loss ◽  
University Level ◽  
Level I ◽  
Injured Patients

We examined financial data from a University Level I Trauma Center from 1994 to 2014. We sought to investigate the hypothesis that lower injury severity correlates with increased profitability. We examined data from July 1994 to December 2014. This included hospital charges, Medicare cost data, final reimbursement, and payor source. Patients were separated into Injury Severity Score (ISS) groupings: 0 to 9, 10 to 14, 15 to 24, >24, and >14. Mean and standard deviation of mean are reported. We had complete data on 27,582 patients. Overall profit per case when subtracting costs from reimbursements was $1,932/case (total profit in unadjusted dollars = $53,475,828 or $2,673,791/year). When examined by ISS, profitability was significantly different between ISS 0 to 14 and 15 to 24, and > 24. When charge data were examined, the average loss per case was -$31,313 for the 27,582 patient data set. When using cost, and not charge data, overall trauma care had a positive margin. Severely injured patients (ISS > 14) were the most profitable, with a significantly higher profit per case than all other groupings. Only through examination of cost data can realistic determinations of trauma center profitability be made. If only charge data had been examined in this study, the overall loss from the 20-year period would have been $863,675,166 and not a profit of $53,475,828.

Initial Approach to the Management of Multisystem Trauma

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.

Suburban geriatric trauma: the experiences of a level I trauma center

1995 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 379-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
F DeKeyser ◽  
D Carolan ◽  
A Trask
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Center ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
Geriatric Trauma ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Younger Patients ◽  
Severity Scores ◽  
Trauma Scores

BACKGROUND: As the mean age of the US population increases, so does the incidence of geriatric trauma. Investigators have shown that the elderly have high morbidity and mortality rates associated with traumatic injuries. OBJECTIVE: To compare the severity of injury, mortality, and functional outcomes of geriatric patients with younger patients admitted to a suburban trauma center. METHOD: A convenience sample of trauma patients who were 65 years old or older was compared with trauma patients who were 35 to 45 and 55 to 64 years old. Demographic data, injury data, Injury Severity Scores, Revised Trauma Scores, length of stay, and functional ability outcomes were abstracted from a trauma registry in aggregate form and then analyzed. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 766 subjects (age 35-45, n = 223; age 55-64, n = 135; age 65 and older, n = 408) with a mean age of 64.6 years. A larger percentage of the elderly were victims of falls; younger trauma patients were more likely to be victims of motor vehicle crashes. Significant differences were found between age groups on Glasgow Coma Scale scores. Revised Trauma Scores, and length of stay. Significant differences were not found on Injury Severity Scores, mortality rates, or functional outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although anatomic injury severity of elderly patients was similar to that of younger patients, the elderly demonstrated greater physiologic compromise and longer hospital stays. Mortality rates were lower for the elderly group, but this result might be because a larger proportion of elderly patients were hospitalized with minor or moderate injuries.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Protective Equipment Used Among Motorbike Riders

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 44-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roxanne Stiles ◽  
Clint Benge ◽  
P.J. Stiles ◽  
Fanglong Dong ◽  
Jeanette Ward ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Trauma Center ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Safety Equipment ◽  
Hospital Outcomes ◽  
Equipment Usage ◽  
Level I

Introduction. This study compared outcomes between patientsinjured at a motorbike track, which requires riders to follow safetyequipment guidelines, and those involved in recreational riding wheresafety equipment usage is voluntary. Methods. A retrospective review was conducted of all patients presentingwith motorbike-related injuries at an American College ofSurgeons verified level-I trauma center between January 1, 2009 andDecember 31, 2013. Data collected included demographics, injurydetails, safety equipment use, hospitalization details, and dischargedisposition. Comparisons were made regarding protective equipmentusage. Results. Among the 115 patients admitted, more than half (54.8%, n =63) were injured on a motorbike track, and 45.2% (n = 52) were injuredin a recreational setting. The majority of patients were male (93.9%),Caucasian (97.4%), and between the ages of 18 to 54 (64.4%). Helmetusage was higher among track riders (95.2%, n = 60) than recreationalriders (46.2%, n = 24, p < 0.0001). Comparisons of injury severity andoutcomes between those who wore protective equipment and thosewho did not were not significant. Conclusions. Even though track riders wore protective equipmentmore than recreational riders, there was no difference between thegroups regarding injury severity or hospital outcomes. These resultssuggested that motocross riders should not rely on protective equipmentas the only measure of injury prevention.Kans J Med 2018;11(2):44-47.

Helmets Matter: Kentucky All-Terrain Vehicle Crashes Seen at a Tennessee Trauma Center

2018 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-293
Author(s):  
George M. Testerman ◽  
Daniel C. Prior ◽  
Tamie D. Wells ◽  
Sarah E. Rollins ◽  
Stephen L. Oesch
Keyword(s):  
Relative Risk ◽  
Trauma Center ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Trauma Registry ◽  
Head Injuries ◽  
Multiple Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Multiple Logistic Regression ◽  
Helmet Use ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Helmet Laws

All-terrain vehicle (ATV) safety laws, including helmet use, vary by state and are sporadically enforced. Kentucky state laws require safety helmets only for younger riders. We hypothesized that ATV riders injured in Kentucky and seen at a Tennessee trauma center would more likely be unhelmeted, have more severe head injuries, and have higher mortality rates than those injured in Virginia or Tennessee. A Trauma Registry review of 750 injured ATV riders from June 1, 2005, through June 1, 2015 examined state location of accident, helmet use, markers of injury severity, and outcomes. Multiple logistic regression analysis examined predictors of severe head injuries and death with P < 0.05 significant. Unhelmeted ATV rider status predicted more severe head injuries (relative risk 23.5, P < 0.001) and death (relative risk 4.6, P < 0.001). ATV riders injured in the state of Kentucky were twice as numerous. In addition, they were more likely than ATVriders injured in Tennessee or Virginia to be unhelmeted, to have severe head injuries, and to sustain fatal injuries (all P < 0.001). This single trauma center study lends support for maintaining and enforcing current universal helmet laws for ATVriders of all ages in states where they are in effect and highlights the need to upgrade helmet laws that apply only to some riders.

Inter-rater Variability Interferes with Reproducibility of Splenic Injury Grades Reported to the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma

2016 ◽  
Vol 82 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-174
Author(s):  
Eric J. Ferguson ◽  
Michael Walsh ◽  
Megan Brown
Keyword(s):  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Intraclass Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Trauma Center ◽  
Ordinal Data ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Splenic Injury ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
American College Of Surgeons ◽  
Level I ◽  
Picture Archiving And Communication

The objective of this study was to determine reproducibility of our splenic injury grading data, previously reported to the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma for our most recent site visit. The institutional registry of a Level I trauma center was queried to identify adult patients presenting with blunt splenic injury between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2013. Original CT scans were scanned into the picture archiving and communication system and subsequently reviewed by four trauma surgeons and two radiologists for clinical impressions of splenic injury grade. Grades assigned by the clinician and the grade recorded in the registry were compared for inter-rater reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient, as a means of assessing variance of ordinal data. The intraclass correlation coefficient in our model was 0.77, which indicates that 77 per cent of the observed variance was due to true variance and 23 per cent of the variance was due to error. Variability in grading may, in some cases, underestimate injury severity and compromise the clinician's expectation of clinical outcome, both in real-time, as well as during retrospective review processes such as those used during the trauma center reverification process.

All-Terrain Vehicle Injuries: Are They Dangerous? A 6-Year Experience at a Level I Trauma Center after Legislative Regulations Expired

2005 ◽  
Vol 71 (11) ◽  
pp. 937-941 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.H. Fonseca ◽  
M.G. Ochsner ◽  
W.J. Bromberg ◽  
D. Gantt
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Head Injuries ◽  
Progressive Increase ◽  
Helmet Use ◽  
Closed Head Injuries ◽  
Safety Regulations ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Closed Head ◽  
Level I

All-terrain vehicles (ATVs) have increased in popularity and sales since 1971. This rise in popularity led to an increase in injuries resulting in voluntary industry rider safety regulations in 1988, which expired without renewal in 1998. Our purpose was twofold, to determine the incidence and severity of ATV injuries in our patient population and what, if any impact the safety regulations had. To further characterize the risk of ATV use, we compared them to a vehicle generally recognized as dangerous, the motorcycle (MC). Our trauma registry was reviewed from January 1998 through August 2004 for ATV or MC injured. Data collected included age, gender, mortality, Injury Severity Score (ISS), helmet use, and injury distribution. These were compared to our data from the decade of regulation. There were 352 MC and 221 ATV patients. ATV injured demonstrated a higher proportion of pediatric and female patients ( P < 0.001 and P < 0.01, respectively), a decrease in helmet use (8.6% vs 64.7%, P < 0.001), and increased closed head injuries (CHI) (54.2% vs 44.9%, P < 0.05) compared with MC injured. ISS and mortality were similar. The average number of patients from 1988 to 1998 was 6.9/yr compared to 31.6/yr ( P < 0.001) during 1998–2004 with equal ISS. Our data show that there has been a dramatic and progressive increase in the number of ATV crashes since expiration of industry regulations. ATVs are as dangerous as MCs based on patient ISS and mortality. There are significantly more children and women injured on ATVs. The lower rate of helmet use in ATVs may account for the significantly greater incidence of CHI. These data mandate the need for injury prevention efforts for ATV riders, in particular children, through increased public awareness and new legislation.

Impact of Traumatic Suicide Methods on a Level I Trauma Center

2010 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
James G. Bittner ◽  
Michael L. Hawkins ◽  
Linda R. Atteberry ◽  
Colville H. Ferdinand ◽  
Regina S. Medeiros
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Center ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Healthcare Expenditures ◽  
Suicide Methods ◽  
Level I ◽  
Drug And Alcohol ◽  
Related Mortality

Suicide is a major, preventable public health issue. Although firearm-related mechanisms commonly result in death, nonfirearm methods cause significant morbidity and healthcare expenditures. The goal of this study is to compare risk factors and outcomes of firearm and nonfirearm traumatic suicide methods. This retrospective cohort study identified 146 patients who attempted traumatic suicide between 2002 and 2007 at a Level I trauma center. Overall, mean age was 40.2 years, 83 per cent were male, 74 per cent were white, and mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 12.7. Most individuals (53%) attempted suicide by firearms and 25 per cent died (84% firearm, 16% nonfirearm techniques). Subjects were more likely to die if they were older than 60 years-old, presented with an ISS greater than 16, or used a firearm. On average, patients using a firearm were older and had a higher ISS and mortality rate compared with those using nonfirearm methods. There was no statistical difference between cohorts with regard to gender, ethnicity, positive drug and alcohol screens, requirement for operation, intensive care unit admission, and hospital length of stay. Nonfirearm traumatic suicide prevention strategies aimed at select individuals may decrease overall attempts, reduce mechanism-related mortality, and potentially impact healthcare expenditures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document