scholarly journals Falls downstairs: The impact on a UK major trauma centre

Trauma ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 146040862110029
Author(s):  
Joshua Callon ◽  
Daniel Thomas ◽  
Simon J Mercer
Keyword(s):  
Older Patients ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Average Length ◽  
Trauma Team ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Mechanism Of Injury ◽  
Younger Patients ◽  
Major Trauma Centre ◽  
The Impact

Introduction Major trauma centres are increasingly managing a significant injury burden in older patients, with falling downstairs being a prevalent mechanism of injury. Literature evaluating the impact of falls on stairs upon UK trauma networks is limited. Gaining a greater understanding of this may allow for more effective planning of services and improvements in training and education. This study evaluates the impact of falls downstairs on a UK major trauma centre. Methods A single centre retrospective service evaluation of local major trauma data over a 3-year period from 01/01/2017 to 31/12/2019. Included were patients who activated a trauma call whose mechanism of injury recorded at the time of admission was a fall downstairs. We excluded patients less than 16 years of age. Results There were 4480 major trauma patients who presented in the study period and of these, 860 (19.2%) sustained injuries following a fall downstairs. The most common age group presenting was 70–79 years; younger patients (<60 years) made up 43.3% with the majority (56.7%) being older. All but one patient were managed by a consultant-led trauma team, 6.4% of patients were admitted to critical care and 1% received an urgent operation. The overall mortality rate was 8.5%. Older patients made up 85% of those who died and had nearly four times longer average length of stay than younger patients (9.69 v 2.49 days). Conclusion Falls downstairs place a significant burden on the major trauma centre. There is a stark contrast in the use of hospital resources and outcomes between older and younger patients.

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 Falling down a flight of stairs: The impact of age and intoxication on injury pattern and severity

Trauma ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 169-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hridesh Chatha ◽  
Ian Sammy ◽  
Michael Hickey ◽  
Abdo Sattout ◽  
John Hollingsworth
Keyword(s):  
Older Patients ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Alcohol Intoxication ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Injury Pattern ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Severe Injuries ◽  
Body Regions ◽  
Major Trauma Centre ◽  
The Impact

Background Falling down a flight of stairs is a common injury mechanism in major trauma patients, but little research has been undertaken into the impact of age and alcohol intoxication on the injury patterns of these patients. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of age and alcohol intoxication on injury pattern and severity in patients who fell down a flight of stairs. Methods This was a retrospective observational study of prospectively collected trauma registry data from a major trauma centre in the United Kingdom comparing older and younger adult patients admitted to the Emergency Department following a fall down a flight of stairs between July 2012 and March 2015. Results Older patients were more likely to suffer injuries to all body regions and sustained more severe injuries to the spine; they were also more likely to suffer polytrauma (23.6% versus 10.6%; p < 0.001). Intoxicated patients were more likely to suffer injuries to the head and neck (42.9% versus 30.5%; p = 0.006) and were significantly younger than sober patients (53 versus 69 years; p < 0.001). Conclusion Older patients who fall down a flight of stairs are significantly different from their younger counterparts, with a different injury pattern and a greater likelihood of polytrauma. In addition, alcohol intoxication also affects injury pattern in people who have fallen down a flight of stairs, increasing the risk of traumatic brain injury. Both age and intoxication should be considered when managing these patients.

scholarly journals The impact of trauma centre designation on open tibial fracture management

2013 ◽  
Vol 95 (3) ◽  
pp. 184-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Stammers ◽  
D Williams ◽  
J Hunter ◽  
M Vesely ◽  
D Nielsen
Keyword(s):  
Major Trauma ◽  
Average Length ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Tibial Fractures ◽  
Open Tibial Fractures ◽  
Major Trauma Centre ◽  
Fracture Management ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Trauma Networks ◽  
The Impact

Introduction The British Orthopaedic Association/British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons guidelines for the management of open tibial fractures recommend early senior combined orthopaedic and plastic surgical input with appropriate facilities to manage a high caseload. The aim of this study was to assess whether becoming a major trauma centre has affected the management of patients with open tibial fractures. Methods Data were obtained prospectively on consecutive open tibial fractures during two eight-month periods: before and after becoming a trauma centre. Results Overall, 29 open tibial fractures were admitted after designation as a major trauma centre compared with 15 previously. Of the 29 patients, 21 came directly or as transfers from another accident and emergency deparment (previously 8 of 15). The time to transfer patients admitted initially to local orthopaedic departments has fallen from 205.7 hours to 37.4 hours (p=0.084). Tertiary transferred patients had a longer hospital stay (16.3 vs 14.9 days) and had more operations (3.7 vs 2.6, p=0.08) than direct admissions. As a trauma centre, there were improvements in time to definitive skeletal stabilisation (4.7 vs 2.2 days, p=0.06), skin coverage (8.3 vs 3.7 days, p=0.06), average number of operations (4.2 vs 2.3, p=0.002) and average length of hospital admission (26.6 vs 15.3 days, p=0.05). Conclusions The volume and management of open tibial fractures, independent of fracture grade, has been directly affected by the introduction of a trauma centre enabling early combined senior orthopaedic and plastic surgical input. Our data strongly support the benefits of trauma centres and the continuing development of trauma networks in the management of open tibial fractures.

P9 Impact of the relocation of a regional neuroscience service on major trauma patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. e28.2-e28
Author(s):  
C Cabaret ◽  
M Nelson ◽  
M Foroughi
Keyword(s):  
Major Trauma ◽  
Strong Association ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Major Trauma Centre ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Ct Head ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Mean Time

ObjectivesEvaluating the impact of relocating a regional neuroscience service on major trauma patients.DesignRetrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from 01/08/2013 to 31/07/2017.SubjectsPatients≥20 years with a TBI in the 2 years pre-relocation (cohort 1) and 2 years post-relocation (cohort 2).MethodsPatients were identified using the TARN registry. Comparison of the cohorts for demographics, type of neurosurgical input, site of first presentation and the times to first CT head and operation was conducted using cross-tabulation, percentages and statistical analysis (SPSS).Results30% of patients in cohort 1 (112 or 373) were admitted in neurosurgery. This increased to 40% of patients in cohort 2 (181 of 450). There was an increase in admissions for monitoring (70% vs 82%). Patients<60 years had a higher increment in admission (+16 points) than patients≥60 years (+8 points). A strong association was found between the relocation of the neuroscience service and the increase in proportion of patients first transported to the major trauma centre (63% vs 74%; p=0.037). There was a significant decrease in the mean time to operation (3.9 hour vs 2.0 hour; p=0.008) and no significant difference in the mean time to first CT head (1.3 hour vs 1.4 hour; p=0.689).ConclusionsThe relocation of neurosurgery has resulted in a significant increase in admission of patients<60 years with TBI in neurosurgery for monitoring, an increase in the proportion of patients first transported to the MTC and a reduction in the time to operation.

P22 Phenytoin versus levetiracetam for post traumatic brain injury seizure prophylaxis; a retrospective study at a UK major trauma centre

2019 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. e31.2-e31
Author(s):  
L Harris ◽  
S Hateley ◽  
B Seemungal
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Average Length ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Seizure Prophylaxis ◽  
Major Trauma Centre ◽  
The Impact

Objectives12% of patients with severe Traumatic brain injury (TBI) suffer from seizures. Evidence suggests that the use of an antiepileptic drug (AED) is beneficial in preventing early post TBI seizures. To date, no specific NICE guidelines exist on the choice of post TBI seizure prophylaxis. This study aims to identify the trend in AED usage, the impact on length of stay and to compare the tolerability of phenytoin and levetiracetam.DesignRetrospective observational study.Subjects201 patients.MethodsAll patients admitted to a Major Trauma Unit following a head injury treated with levetiracetam or phenytoin for seizure prophylaxis were included in the study. Data was collected between October 2013 – September 2014 and November 2016 – October 2017. Patient demographics, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) on admission, length of treatment, AED toxicity, length of stay, complications, surgical input and length of ITU stay were recorded.Results85.6% of patients were treated with phenytoin in 2013–2014% and 82.5% were treated with levetiracetam in 2016–2017. The average length of stay for phenytoin was 23.2 days and 13.9 days for levetiracetam. Subgroup analysis was performed on patients with an admission GCS of 14–15. Length of stay for phenytoin was 14.9 days (SD −11.87) and levetiracetam 9.4 days (SD 10.588) (p=0.07). 24% of patients on phenytoin and 14% on levetiracetam suffered from dizziness.ConclusionsThis suggests that levetiracetam is tolerated better with fewer side effects. We recommend its use in clinical practice.

Comparison of routine blood alcohol tests and ICD-10-AM coding of alcohol involvement for major trauma patients

2021 ◽  
pp. 183335832110371
Author(s):  
Georgina Lau ◽  
Belinda J Gabbe ◽  
Biswadev Mitra ◽  
Paul M Dietze ◽  
Sandra Braaf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Administrative Data ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Blood Alcohol Concentration ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Blood Alcohol ◽  
Alcohol Involvement ◽  
Preventable Risk Factor ◽  
Major Trauma Centre ◽  
Icd 10

Background: Alcohol use is a key preventable risk factor for serious injury. To effectively prevent alcohol-related injuries, we rely on the accurate surveillance of alcohol involvement in injury events. This often involves the use of administrative data, such as International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, Australian Modification (ICD-10-AM) coding. Objective: To evaluate the completeness and accuracy of using administrative coding for the surveillance of alcohol involvement in major trauma injury events by comparing patient blood alcohol concentration (BAC) with ICD-10-AM coding. Method: This retrospective cohort study examined 2918 injury patients aged ≥18 years who presented to a major trauma centre in Victoria, Australia, over a 2-year period, of which 78% ( n = 2286) had BAC data available. Results: While 15% of patients had a non-zero BAC, only 4% had an ICD-10-AM code suggesting acute alcohol involvement. The agreement between blood alcohol test results and ICD-10-AM coding of acute alcohol involvement was fair ( κ = 0.33, 95% confidence interval: 0.27–0.38). Of the 341 patients with a non-zero BAC, 82 (24.0%) had ICD-10-AM codes related to acute alcohol involvement. Supplementary factors Y90 Evidence of alcohol involvement determined by blood alcohol level codes, which specifically describe patient BAC, were assigned to just 29% of eligible patients with a non-zero BAC. Conclusion: ICD-10-AM coding underestimated the proportion of alcohol-related injuries compared to patient BAC. Implications: Given the current role of administrative data in the surveillance of alcohol-related injuries, these findings may have significant implications for the implementation of cost-effective strategies for preventing alcohol-related injuries.

scholarly journals The impact of Major Trauma Centre (MTC) status on paediatric orthopaedic service delivery – 1 year after MTC status designation.

2013 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 566
Author(s):  
Assad Farooq ◽  
Ravindran Visagan ◽  
Yaser Jabber ◽  
Raj Bhattacharya ◽  
Sally Tennant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Service Delivery ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Major Trauma Centre ◽  
Paediatric Orthopaedic ◽  
The Impact

The impact of alcohol intoxication in patients admitted due to assault at an Australian major trauma centre: a trauma registry study from 1999 to 2009

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 390-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael M Dinh ◽  
Kendall J Bein ◽  
Susan Roncal ◽  
Alexandra L C Martiniuk ◽  
Soufiane Boufous
Keyword(s):  
Major Trauma ◽  
Trauma Registry ◽  
Alcohol Intoxication ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Registry Study ◽  
Major Trauma Centre ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals 257 The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Mental Health Associated Trauma, Admissions and Fractures at a London Major Trauma Centre

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽  
Author(s):  
M S Jamal ◽  
D Hay ◽  
K Al-Tawil ◽  
A Petohazi ◽  
V Gulli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Psychiatric Diagnosis ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Major Trauma Centre ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Aim Non-injury related factors have been extensively studied in major trauma and shown to have a significant impact on patient outcomes, with mental illness and associated medication use proven to have a negative effect on bone health and fracture healing. We report the epidemiological effect of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health associated Orthopaedic trauma, fractures, and admissions to our centre. Method We collated data retrospectively from the electronic records of Orthopaedic inpatients in an 8-week non-COVID and COVID period analysing demographic data, referral and admission numbers, orthopaedic injuries, surgery performed and patient co-morbidities including psychiatric history. Results here were 824 Orthopaedic referrals and 358 admissions (6/day) in the non-COVID period with 38/358 (10.6%) admissions having a psychiatric diagnosis and 30/358 (8.4%) also having a fracture. This was compared to 473 referrals and 195 admissions (3/day) in the COVID period with 73/195 (37.4%) admissions having a documented psychiatric diagnosis and 47/195 (24.1%) a fracture. 22/38 (57.9%) and 52/73 (71.2%) patients were known to mental health services, respectively. Conclusions Whilst total numbers utilising the Orthopaedic service decreased, the impact of the pandemic and lockdown disproportionately affected those with mental health problems, a group already at higher risk of poorer functional outcomes and non-union. The proportion of patients with both a fracture and a psychiatric diagnosis more than doubled and the number of patients presenting due to a traumatic suicide attempt almost tripled. It is imperative that adequate support is in place for vulnerable mental health patients, particularly as we are currently experiencing the “second wave” of COVID-19.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document