scholarly journals Simplified treatment algorithm for the management of trauma-induced hemorrhage without viscoelastic testing

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e000779
Author(s):  
Sebastian Casu
Keyword(s):  
Major Trauma ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Treatment Algorithm ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Trauma Team ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Treatment Protocols ◽  
Treatment Algorithms ◽  
Number Of Treatment ◽  
Uncontrolled Bleeding

Uncontrolled bleeding after major trauma remains a significant cause of death, with up to a third of trauma patients presenting with signs of coagulopathy at hospital admission. Rapid correction of coagulopathy is therefore vital to improve mortality rates and patient outcomes in this population. Early and repeated monitoring of coagulation parameters followed by clear protocols to correct hemostasis is the recommended standard of care for bleeding trauma patients. However, although a number of treatment algorithms are available, these are frequently complex and can rely on the use of viscoelastic testing, which is not available in all treatment centers. We therefore set out to develop a concise and pragmatic algorithm to guide treatment of bleeding trauma patients without the use of point-of-care viscoelastic testing. The algorithm we present here is based on published guidelines and research, includes recommendations regarding treatment and dosing, and is simple and clear enough for even an inexperienced physician to follow. In this way, we have demonstrated that treatment protocols can be developed and adapted to the resources available, to offer clear and relevant guidance to the entire trauma team.

eFAST for Pneumothorax: Real-Life Application in an Urban Level 1 Center by Trauma Team Members

2018 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Maximus ◽  
Cesar Figueroa ◽  
Matthew Whealon ◽  
Jacqueline Pham ◽  
Eric Kuncir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real Life ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Trauma Team ◽  
Tube Thoracostomy ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Team Members ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
Clinically Significant

The focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) examination has become the standard of care for rapid evaluation of trauma patients. Extended FAST (eFAST) is the use of ultra-sonography for the detection of pneumothorax (PTX). The exact sensitivity and specificity of eFAST detecting traumatic PTX during practical “real-life” application is yet to be investigated. This is a retrospective review of all trauma patients with a diagnosis of PTX, who were treated at a large level 1 urban trauma center from March 2013 through July 2014. Charts were reviewed for results of imaging, which included eFAST, chest X-ray, and CT scan. The requirement of tube thoracostomy and mechanism of injury were also analyzed. A total of 369 patients with a diagnosis of PTX were identified. A total of 69 patients were excluded, as eFASTwas either not performed or not documented, leaving 300 patients identified with PTX. A total of 113 patients had clinically significant PTX (37.6%), requiring immediate tube thoracostomy placement. eFAST yielded a positive diagnosis of PTX in 19 patients (16.8%), and all were clinically significant, requiring tube thoracostomy. Chest X-ray detected clinically significant PTX in 105 patients (92.9%). The literature on the utility of eFAST for PTX in trauma is variable. Our data show that although specific for clinically significant traumatic PTX, it has poor sensitivity when performed by clinicians with variable levels of ultrasound training. We conclude that CT is still the gold standard in detecting PTX, and clinicians performing eFAST should have adequate training.

scholarly journals Trauma recidivism in a Canadian province: a 14-year registry review

CJEM ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 473-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mete Erdogan ◽  
Nelofar Kureshi ◽  
Mark Asbridge ◽  
Robert S. Green
Keyword(s):  
Nova Scotia ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Trauma Registry ◽  
Trauma Team ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Screening And Brief Intervention ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Trauma Recidivism

ABSTRACTObjectivesTo determine the rate of recurrent major trauma (i.e., trauma recidivism) using a provincial population-based trauma registry. We compared outcomes between recidivists and non-recidivists, and assessed factors associated with recidivism and mortality.MethodsReview of all adult (>17 years) major trauma patients in Nova Scotia (2001–2015) using data from the Nova Scotia Trauma Registry. Outcomes of interest were mortality, duration of hospital stay, and in-hospital complications. Multiple regression was used to assess factors associated with recidivism and mortality.ResultsOf 9,365 major trauma patients, 2% (150/9365) were recidivists. Mean age at initial injury was 52 ± 21.5 years; 73% were male. The mortality rate for both recidivists and non-recidivists was 31%. However, after adjusting for potential confounders the likelihood of mortality was over 3 times greater for recidivists compared to non-recidivists (OR 3.67, 95% CI 2.06–6.54). Other factors associated with mortality included age, male gender, penetrating injury, Injury Severity Score, trauma team activation (TTA) and admission to the intensive care unit. The only variables associated with recidivism were age (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97–1.00) and TTA (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.34–0.96).ConclusionsThis is the first provincial investigation of major trauma recidivism in Canada. While recidivism was infrequent (2%), the adjusted odds of mortality were over three times greater for recidivists. Further research is warranted to determine the effectiveness of strategies for reducing rates of major trauma recidivism such as screening and brief intervention in cases of violence or substance abuse.

scholarly journals LO61: A modified Delphi study to identify trauma care modifiers for older adults

CJEM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (S1) ◽  
pp. S29-S30
Author(s):  
K. Yadav ◽  
V. Boucher ◽  
N. Le Sage ◽  
C. Malo ◽  
E. Mercier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Trauma Care ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Trauma Team ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Median Score ◽  
Modified Delphi

Introduction: Older (age >=65 years) trauma patients suffer increased morbidity and mortality. This is due to under-triage of older trauma victims, resulting in lack of transfer to a trauma centre or failure to activate the trauma team. There are currently no Canadian guidelines for the management of older trauma patients. The objective of this study was to identify modifiers to the prehospital and emergency department (ED) phases of major trauma care for older adults based on expert consensus. Methods: We conducted a modified Delphi study to assess senior-friendly major trauma care modifiers based on national expert consensus. The panel consisted of 24 trauma care providers across Canada, including medical directors, paramedics, emergency physicians, emergency nurses, trauma surgeons and trauma administrators. Following a literature review, we developed an online Delphi survey consisting of 16 trauma care modifiers. Three online survey rounds were distributed and panelists were asked to score items on a 9-point Likert scale. The following predetermined thresholds were used: appropriate (median score 7–9, without disagreement); inappropriate (median score 1–3; without disagreement), and uncertain (any median score with disagreement). The disagreement index (DI) is a method for measuring consensus within groups. Agreement was defined a priori as a DI score <1. Results: There was a 100% response rate for all survey rounds. Three new trauma care modifiers were suggested by panelists. Of 19 trauma care modifiers, the expert panel achieved consensus agreement for 17 items. The prehospital modifier with the strongest agreement to transfer to a trauma centre was a respiratory rate <10 or >20 breaths/minute or needing ventilatory support (DI = 0.24). The ED modifier with the strongest level of agreement was obtaining a 12-lead electrocardiogram following the primary and secondary survey for all older adults (DI = 0.01). Two trauma care modifiers failed to reach consensus agreement: transporting older patients with ground level falls to a trauma centre and activating the trauma team based solely on an age >=65 years. Conclusion: Using a modified Delphi process, an expert panel agreed upon 17 trauma care modifiers for older adults in the prehospital and ED phases of care. These modifiers may improve the delivery of senior-friendly trauma care and should be considered when developing local and national trauma guidelines.

Principles of trauma management

2018 ◽  
pp. 151-160
Author(s):  
Abdullah Jibawi ◽  
Mohamed Baguneid ◽  
Arnab Bhowmick
Keyword(s):  
Major Trauma ◽  
Trauma Team ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Trauma Management ◽  
Economic Output ◽  
Specific Organ ◽  
Life Threatening ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
The Impact

Major trauma is defined as an injury or a combination of injuries that are life-threatening and could be life changing because it may result in long-term disability. The impact of trauma is huge. Injuries from accidental trauma worldwide causes moderate to severe disability in > 45m people each year. Trauma is the biggest killer of people age < 45y. UK annual trauma cost is ~£0.35b in immediate treatment; subsequent financial costs are unknown. UK annual lost economic output due to major trauma is ~£3.5b. Trauma management is challenging. Up to 40% of trauma patients have injuries that are initially missed, and up to 20% of these are clinically significant. The trauma team should be appropriately formed to achieve the assigned level of care and prioritize management. Guidelines for specific organ trauma management should be followed and practice standardized to ensure the best outcome.

scholarly journals 322 Major Trauma in the Older Person - Major Challenges Ahead

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii1-iii16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael Doyle ◽  
Louise Brent ◽  
Aisling Connolly ◽  
Tomas Breslin ◽  
Sophie Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older People ◽  
Independent Living ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Marked Change ◽  
Trauma Team ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Common Mechanism ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Medical Needs

Abstract Background The mean and median age of major trauma continues to increase for a mean of 36 years in the 1990's to 59 and 61 years respectively in 2016 and 2017. The age planning of major trauma has important implications for healthcare planning. Methods The major trauma audit was established by the National Office of Clinical Audit (NOCA) in 2013 and focuses on the most severely injured trauma patients in our healthcare system. The methodological approach is provided by the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN). Since 2016 all 26 eligible hospitals have been participating in the audit and the coverage is now 86%.Data has been collected on more than 15000 trauma patients to date. Results There were 5061 recorded major trauma cases of which 2233 (44%) were over 65 years in 2017. The most common form of injury (57%) was falls less than two metres (low falls) and this began aged 45 years. 50% of injuries occurred in patient's own home. Only 11% of people were received by a trauma team and this was even lower in the older adult. Older people were very unlikely to be pre-alerted to the Emergency Department prior to arrival. 64% of the mortality from major trauma occurred in the over 65 years. 6%, 7% and 10% of patients aged 65-74, 75-84 and over 85's respectively were discharged directly to nursing home. Conclusion There is a marked change in the age profile sustaining major trauma since the late 1990's. Patients today are older with more complex medical needs, have greater lengths of stay and many do not return to independent living. The most common mechanism of injury for older people is a low fall at home. We need to prevent low galls using a multidisciplinary, multi-agency approach.

scholarly journals 251 The frailty in major trauma study (FRAIL-T): feasibility of nurse lead frailty assessment in elderly trauma and the impact on outcomes

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (12) ◽  
pp. 840.2-840
Author(s):  
Heather Jarman ◽  
Robert Crouch ◽  
Mark Baxter ◽  
Bebhinn Dillane ◽  
Chao Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Frailty Index ◽  
Kappa Statistic ◽  
Trauma Team ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Clinical Frailty Scale ◽  
Frailty Assessment ◽  
Trauma Population ◽  
The Impact

Aims/Objectives/BackgroundFrailty screening for major trauma patients has recently become part of the best practice commissioning tariff within NHS England, yet there is no consensus as to who should carry out this assessment or which tool best identifies frailty in the Emergency Department (ED). As the trauma population ages there is a need for accurate early identification of frailty in the ED to underpin frailty specific major trauma pathways. The primary aim of this study was to determine the feasibility and accuracy of ED nurse-led frailty assessment in patients ≥ 65 years admitted to Major Trauma Centres (MTCs).Methods/DesignA prospective observational study was conducted across five UK MTCs, enrolling 370 participants over nine months. Eligible patients were aged 65 or more requiring trauma team activation. Frailty was assessed in the ED using three different tools: Trauma Specific Frailty Index (TSFI); Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS); PRISMA-7. ED nurse frailty assessment was correlated with Geriatrician assessment within 72 hours of admission using Spearman’s correlation coefficient and kappa statistic for measuring the interrater agreement.Results/ConclusionsComplete frailty assessments were calculated for CFS in 99.4% of patients, PRISMA7 in 95.9% and TSFI in 37.58%. Rates of frailty differed between tools: CFS 32%, PRISMA7 57% and TSFI 92% whilst Geriatrician determined frailty was 37%. In all tools frail patients were older (p<0.001) and falls <2 m were the leading mechanism of injury (p<0.05). CFS showed both strong correlation (rs 0.639,p<0.001) and substantial agreement (kappa 0.637,p<0.001) with Geriatrician assessment within 72 hours of admission.ED nurses can accurately assess older major trauma patients for frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale. These findings support assessment of frailty in the ED in order to identify patients who would benefit from early frailty specific care.

Major Trauma

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pawan Gupta
Keyword(s):  
High Speed ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Trauma Team ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Ambulance Personnel ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Resuscitation Room ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Uk

In the UK, trauma is currently the commonest cause of death in people <40 years and its incidence is predicted to rise over the next 20 years. So you have an important role in the assessment and management of this group of patients. Doctors of the ED perform a vital role in the early stages of management of trauma patients. In patients with multiple injuries, the care is delivered by a trauma team constituted by middle-grade doctors from various specialties. A senior doctor, usually from the ED and with training in dealing with trauma, leads the team. The trauma team is often requested by the prehospital ambulance personnel, but this is not always the case. Although in your first few days you would not be expected to manage such situations on your own, you may come across a patient with serious trauma behind the curtains in a cubicle. Recognizing the seriousness of the situation and calling for help in the form of a trauma team may make all the difference to that patient in terms of recovery. The principles of assessment and management of trauma patients are discussed in the first answer of this chapter. The ATLS course introduces you to the principles of early management of trauma victims and this can be applied to any trauma patient whom you will see in the ED. The skills you learn on the ATLS course are applicable in many situations. It is advisable to attend this training course while you are working in the ED. You should suspect major trauma in the following situations: • Related to vehicles: high-speed collisions, victim’s ejection from the vehicle (partial or total), rollover, prolonged extrication, etc. • Death of a co-passenger • Pedestrians run over or thrown away to a distance, or with a significant impact (>20mph/32kph) • Falls from a height of >6m in adults and >3m in children or two to three times the height of the child. Resuscitation in the first hour in the resuscitation room has been proved to reduce mortality and morbidity among trauma patients, and so it might be you who will have saved the life of an individual.

Undertriage of the elderly major trauma patient continues in major trauma centre care: a retrospective cohort review

2020 ◽  
pp. emermed-2019-208541
Author(s):  
Antonia C Hoyle ◽  
Leela C Biant ◽  
Mike Young
Keyword(s):  
Older Patients ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Trauma Team ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Severely Injured ◽  
Severely Injured Patients ◽  
Major Trauma Centre ◽  
Trauma Triage ◽  
Injured Patients

BackgroundMajor trauma (Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥16) in older people is increasing, but concerns persist that major trauma is not always recognised in older patients on triage. This study compared undertriage of older and younger adult major trauma patients in the major trauma centre (MTC) setting to investigate this concern.MethodsA retrospective review of Trauma Audit and Research Network data was conducted for three MTCs in the UK for 3 months in 2014. Age, ISS, injury mechanism and injured areas were examined for all severely injured patients (ISS ≥16) and appropriate major trauma triage rates measured via the surrogate markers of trauma team activation and the presence of a consultant first attender, as per standards for major trauma care set by National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcomes and Deaths, Royal College of Surgeons of England and the British Orthopaedic Association. Trends in older (age ≥65) and younger (ages 18–64) adult major trauma presentation, triage and reception were reviewed.ResultsOf 153 severely injured patients, 46 were aged ≥65. Older patients were significantly less likely to receive the attention of a consultant first attender or trauma team. Similar trends were also seen on subgroup analysis by mechanism of injury or number of injured body areas. Older major trauma patients exhibit a higher mortality, despite a lower median ISS (older patient ISS=20 (IQR 16–25), younger patient ISS=25 (IQR 18–29)).ConclusionOlder major trauma patients are at greater risk of undertriage, even in the MTC environment. Existing hospital trauma triage practices should be further investigated to explain and reduce undertriage of elderly trauma patients.

scholarly journals Trauma-induced coagulopathy. A narrative review of goal-directed hemostatic resuscitation

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Federica Pigna ◽  
Giuseppe Lippi ◽  
Simone Saronni ◽  
Gianfranco Cervellin
Keyword(s):  
Major Trauma ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Clinical Information ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Unfavourable Outcome ◽  
Hemostatic Resuscitation ◽  
Trauma Induced Coagulopathy ◽  
Coagulation Tests ◽  
Post Traumatic ◽  
Reduction Of Mortality

Post-traumatic haemorrhage is the leading cause of death in trauma patients. The development of coagulopathy substantially contributes to bleeding severity and to the ensuing unfavourable outcome. Trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC) can be seen in 10-25% of patients with major trauma, and its early and appropriate therapeutic management leads to considerable reduction of mortality risk. Due to the extreme complexity of TIC pathophysiology, the limitations of conventional coagulation tests (CCTs) have become evident in recent years. Unlike these routine tests, point of care viscoelastic tests (VET) such as thromboelastogram (TEG) or rotational thromboelastography (ROTEM) provide valuable clinical information by real time assessment of changes in viscoelastic properties of blood throughout clot formation. This review was aimed to collect and discuss available evidence on goal-directed hemostatic resuscitation, based on TEG or ROTEM data. We included studies with patients aged 18 years or older, major trauma, and needing massive transfusions. Overall, 6 studies totalling 1533 patients were finally included. A total number of 288 patients died, 98 of whom in the TEG- or ROTEM-guided cohorts (i.e., intervention groups). A 36% reduction of death was observed in the intervention groups (relative risk, 0.641; 95% CI 0.517-0.795; P<0.001). Our results show that VET-guided management is effective to reduce mortality compared to conventional management with CCTs. Except for mortality, all others endpoints were heterogeneous across the studies. This emphasize the need of scheduling new and well-designed trials, aimed to better define the optimal strategy for TIC management.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document