A Handoff Protocol for Pediatric Trauma Patients at a Rural Level One Trauma Center Reduces Length of Stay

2020 ◽  
pp. 000313482095633
Author(s):  
Evelyn Coile ◽  
Kathryn Bailey ◽  
Eric J. Clayton ◽  
Tatiana R. Eversley Kelso ◽  
Heather MacNew
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Trauma Center ◽  
Pediatric Trauma ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Ancillary Staff ◽  
Trauma Triage ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
Trauma Surgeons ◽  
Level 1 Trauma Center

Background The management of the pediatric trauma patient is variable among trauma centers. In some institutions, the trauma surgeon maintains control of the patient throughout the hospital stay, while others transfer to a pediatric specialist after the initial evaluation and resuscitation period. We hypothesized that handoff to the pediatric surgeon would decrease the length of stay by more efficient coordination with pediatric subspecialists and ancillary staff. Methods A retrospective review from October 2014 to October 2018 was conducted at our rural level 1 trauma center analyzing the length of stay across all demographics and trauma triage levels before and after institution of a handoff protocol from adult specialized trauma surgeons to pediatric surgeons within a 24-hour window. Further analysis included emergency department (ED) disposition to include the effect of handoff on the length of stay in the setting of a higher post-ED acuity, that is, disposition of monitored beds. Results 1267 patient charts were analyzed and the mean length of stay was reduced by .38 days ( t = 5.92, P < .0005) across all demographics, trauma triage levels, post-ED dispositions, and mechanisms of injury after institution of our handoff protocol. Conclusion Handoff from adult specialized trauma surgeons to pediatric surgeons within a 24-hour window at a rural level 1 trauma center significantly improved the length of stay by .38 ( t = 5.92, P < .0005) among pediatric trauma patients in all demographics, trauma triage activations levels, mechanisms of injury, and post-ED dispositions acuity levels.

scholarly journals Does emergency medicine length of stay predict trauma outcomes at a Level 1 Trauma Center?

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin Powers Kinney ◽  
Kamal Gursahani ◽  
Eric Armbrecht ◽  
Preeti Dalawari
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Trauma Center ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Hospital Capacity ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
Level 1 Trauma Center

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.

Experience in an Urban Level 1 Trauma Center With Tranexamic Acid in Pediatric Trauma: A Retrospective Chart Review

2020 ◽  
pp. 088506661989083
Author(s):  
Julie M. Thomson ◽  
Hanh H. Huynh ◽  
Holly M. Drone ◽  
Jessica L. Jantzer ◽  
Albert K. Tsai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Tranexamic Acid ◽  
Trauma Center ◽  
Surgical Intervention ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Pediatric Trauma ◽  
End Points ◽  
Transfusion Requirements ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
Level 1 Trauma Center

Background: Evidence for tranexamic acid (TXA) in the pharmacologic management of trauma is largely derived from data in adults. Guidance on the use of TXA in pediatric patients comes from studies evaluating its use in cardiac and orthopedic surgery. There is minimal data describing TXA safety and efficacy in pediatric trauma. The purpose of this study is to describe the use of TXA in the management of pediatric trauma and to evaluate its efficacy and safety end points. Methods: This retrospective, observational analysis of pediatric trauma admissions at Hennepin County Medical Center from August 2011 to March 2019 compares patients who did and did not receive TXA. The primary end point is survival to hospital discharge. Secondary end points include surgical intervention, transfusion requirements, length of stay, thrombosis, and TXA dose administered. Results: There were 48 patients aged ≤16 years identified for inclusion using a massive transfusion protocol order. Twenty-nine (60%) patients received TXA. Baseline characteristics and results are presented as median (interquartile range) unless otherwise specified, with statistical significance defined as P < .05. Patients receiving TXA were more likely to be older, but there was no difference in injury type or Injury Severity Score at baseline. There was no difference in survival to discharge or thrombosis. Patients who did not receive TXA had numerically more frequent surgical intervention and longer length of stay, but these did not reach significance. Conclusions: TXA was utilized in 60% of pediatric trauma admissions at a single level 1 trauma center, more commonly in older patients. Although limited by observational design, we found patients receiving TXA had no difference in mortality or thrombosis.

scholarly journals Characteristics of pediatric thoracic trauma: in view of before and after the establishment of a regional trauma center

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pil Young Jung ◽  
Jae Sik Chung ◽  
Youngin Youn ◽  
Chang Wan Kim ◽  
Il Hwan Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Center ◽  
Traffic Accidents ◽  
Thoracic Trauma ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Pediatric Trauma ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Efficient Treatment ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
Tissue Recovery

Abstract Purpose Pediatric thoracic trauma differs from those of adult in terms of the small anatomy and rapid tissue recovery. Therefore, it is important to know the characteristics of the pediatric thoracic trauma to improve treatment results. In addition, this study examined the changes in pediatric thoracic trauma features and results from the establishment of a level 1 regional trauma center. Methods Data of 168 patients’ ≤ 15 years old diagnosed with thoracic trauma between 2008 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Results Pedestrian traffic accidents were the most common cause of chest injury. The average injury severity score was 17.1 ± 12.4 and the average pediatric trauma score was 5.6 ± 4.1. Lung contusion was the most common in 134 cases. There were 48 cases of closed thoracostomy. There was one thoracotomy for cardiac laceration, one case for extracorporeal membranous oxygenation, and six cases for embolization. Of all, 25 patients died, providing a mortality rate of 14.9%. In addition, independent risk factors of in-hospital mortality were hemopneumothorax and cardiac contusion. Since 2014, when the level 1 regional trauma center was established, more severely injured thoracic trauma patients came. However, the mortality was similar in the two periods. Conclusions Understanding the clinical features of pediatric thoracic trauma patients can help in efficient treatment. In addition, as the severity of pediatric thoracic trauma patients has increased due to the establishment of the regional trauma center, so pediatric trauma center should be organized in regional trauma center to improve the outcomes of pediatric thoracic trauma.

scholarly journals Identifying trauma patients with benefit from direct transportation to Level-1 trauma centers

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlie A. Sewalt ◽  
Benjamin Y. Gravesteijn ◽  
Daan Nieboer ◽  
Ewout W. Steyerberg ◽  
Dennis Den Hartog ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Trauma Center ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Trauma Centers ◽  
Absolute Benefit ◽  
Predicted Probability ◽  
Prehospital Triage ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
Level 1 Trauma Center ◽  
Level 2

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.

Delays in Transfer of Elderly Less-injured Trauma Patients Can Have Deadly Consequences

2014 ◽  
Vol 80 (11) ◽  
pp. 1132-1135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter E. Fischer ◽  
Paul D. Colavita ◽  
Gregory P. Fleming ◽  
Toan T. Huynh ◽  
A. Britton Christmas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Center ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Severely Injured ◽  
Severely Injured Patients ◽  
Local Trauma ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
Poor Outcomes ◽  
Injured Patients ◽  
Level 1 Trauma Center

Transfer of severely injured patients to regional trauma centers is often expedited; however, transfer of less-injured, older patients may not evoke the same urgency. We examined referring hospitals’ length of stay (LOS) and compared the subsequent outcomes in less-injured transfer patients (TP) with patients presenting directly (DP) to the trauma center. We reviewed the medical records of less-injured (Injury Severity Score [ISS] 9 or less), older (age older than 60 years) patients transferred to a regional Level 1 trauma center to determine the referring facility LOS, demographics, and injury information. Outcomes of the TP were then compared with similarly injured DP using local trauma registry data. In 2011, there were 1657 transfers; the referring facility LOS averaged greater than 3 hours. In the less-injured patients (ISS 9 or less), the average referring facility LOS was 3 hours 20 minutes compared with 2 hours 24 minutes in more severely injured patients (ISS 25 or greater, P < 0.05). The mortality was significantly lower in the DP patients (5.8% TP vs 2.6% DP, P = 0.035). Delays in transfer of less-injured, older trauma patients can result in poor outcomes including increased mortality. Geographic challenges do not allow for every patient to be transported directly to a trauma center. As a result, we propose further outreach efforts to identify potential causes for delay and to promote compliance with regional referral guidelines.

scholarly journals (P2-91) EMS Trauma Triage: Does the Red-Blue Criteria Enable Overtriage?

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S1) ◽  
pp. s166-s166
Author(s):  
D.M. Higgins ◽  
R.E. Thaxton
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Center ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Initial Assessment ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Minor Trauma ◽  
Trauma Severity ◽  
Physician Assessment ◽  
Assessment Skills ◽  
Trauma Triage ◽  
Level 1

IntroductionWith the current need for effective trauma center utilization, understanding how current trauma triage criteria may promote overtriage will enable both field and hospital teams to provide the most appropriate patient care. It is hypothesized that current Southwest Texas trauma criteria promote overtriage by prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) of patients in favor of a Level 1 trauma facility when compared to physician assessment and Injury Severity Score (ISS).MethodsThis prospective, observational study at a Southwest Texas military Level 1 trauma center compared adult trauma patients' prehospital status noted by EMS personnel with the triage criteria documented by the treating emergency physician. The patients were divided into four groups: Prehospital Criteria Met or Not Met; Arrival Criteria Met or Not Met. Each patient's ISS and mechanism of injury were also collected and compared to initial assessment for predictive value. Descriptive statistics were used.ResultsThe study enrolled 278 adult trauma patients. EMS reported Level 1 trauma status similar to physician assessment (60.1% vs. 59.7%, respectively). The rates patients met Level 1 trauma status corresponded with trauma severity when compared to the ISS. Assessment between EMS and physicians for ISSs were similar among the four groups. Comparisons using multivariate analysis of the four groups found similar ISSs, except for the Prehospital Criteria Met/Arrival Criteria Not Met group. Seventy-five percent of these patients were assigned an ISS in the Minor (ISS < 9) category (p = 0.013).ConclusionTrauma triage criteria assessment skills were similar between EMS personnel and emergency physicians except for identifying minor trauma patients. While the criteria generally led to overtriage, EMS crews appear to overtriage minor trauma patients at a much higher rate.

The Prevalence of Blood-borne Pathogens in Maxillofacial Trauma Patients at a Level 1 Trauma Center

2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Selim G. Gebran ◽  
Philip J. Wasicek ◽  
Yinglun Wu ◽  
Joseph Lopez ◽  
Ledibabari M. Ngaage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Center ◽  
Maxillofacial Trauma ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
Level 1 Trauma Center
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document