Outcomes of severely injured pregnant trauma patients: a multicenter analysis.

Nearly 10% of pregnant women suffer traumatic injury. Clinical outcomes for pregnant trauma patients (PTPs) with severe injuries have not been well studied. We sought to describe outcomes for PTPs presenting with severe injuries, hypothesizing that PTPs with severe injuries will have higher rates of complications and mortality compared to less injured PTPs. A post-hoc analysis of a multi-institutional retrospective study at 12 Level-I/II trauma centers was performed. Patients were stratified into severely injured (injury severity score [ISS] > 15) and not severely injured (ISS < 15) and compared with bivariate analyses. From 950 patients, 32 (3.4%) had severe injuries. Compared to non-severely injured PTPs, severely injured PTPs were of similar maternal age but had younger gestational age (21 vs 26 weeks, p = 0.009). Penetrating trauma was more common in the severely injured cohort (15.6% vs 1.4%, p < 0.001). The severely injured cohort more often underwent an operation (68.8% vs 3.8%, p < 0.001), including a hysterectomy (6.3% vs 0.3%, p < 0.001). The severely injured group had higher rates of complications (34.4% vs 0.9%, p < 0.001), mortality (15.6% vs 0.1%, p < 0.001), a higher rate of fetal delivery (37.5% vs. 6.0%, p < 0.001) and resuscitative hysterotomy (9.4% vs. 0%, p < 0.001). Only approximately 3% of PTPs were severely injured. However, severely injured PTPs had a nearly 40% rate of fetal delivery as well as increased complications and mortality. This included a resuscitative hysterotomy rate of nearly 10%. Significant vigilance must remain when caring for this population.

Predictors of fetal delivery in pregnant trauma patients: A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant trauma patients (PTPs) undergo observation and fetal monitoring following trauma due to possible fetal delivery (FD) or adverse outcome. There is a paucity of data on PTP outcomes, especially related to risk factors for FD. We aimed to identify predictors of posttraumatic FD in potentially viable pregnancies. METHODS: All PTPs (≥18 years) with ≥24-weeks gestational age were included in this multicenter retrospective study at 12 Level-I and II trauma centers between 2016 and 2021. Pregnant trauma patients who underwent FD ((+) FD) were compared to those who did not deliver ((-) FD) during the index hospitalization. Univariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression were performed to identify predictors of FD. RESULTS: Of 591 PTPs, 63 (10.7%) underwent FD, with 4 (6.3%) maternal deaths. The (+) FD group was similar in maternal age (27 vs. 28 years, p = 0.310) but had older gestational age (37 vs. 30 weeks, p < 0.001) and higher mean injury severity score (7.0 vs. 1.5, p < 0.001) compared with the (-) FD group. The (+) FD group had higher rates of vaginal bleeding (6.3% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.002), uterine contractions (46% vs. 23.5%, p < 0.001), and abnormal fetal heart tracing (54.7% vs. 14.6%, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, independent predictors for (+) FD included abdominal injury (odds ratio [OR], 4.07; confidence interval [CI], 1.11-15.02; p = 0.035), gestational age (OR, 1.68 per week ≥24 weeks; CI, 1.44-1.95; p < 0.001), abnormal FHT (OR, 12.72; CI, 5.19-31.17; p < 0.001), and premature rupture of membranes (OR, 35.97; CI, 7.28-177.74; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The FD rate was approximately 10% for PTPs with viable fetal gestational age. Independent risk factors for (+) FD included maternal and fetal factors, many of which are available on initial trauma bay evaluation. These risk factors may help predict FD in the trauma setting and shape future guidelines regarding the recommended observation of PTPs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Significant variation in computed tomography imaging of pregnant trauma patients: a retrospective multicenter study.

PURPOSE: Following motor vehicle collisions (MVCs), patients often undergo extensive computed tomography (CT) imaging. However, pregnant trauma patients (PTPs) represent a unique population where the risk of fetal radiation may supersede the benefits of liberal CT imaging. This study sought to evaluate imaging practices for PTPs, hypothesizing variability in CT imaging among trauma centers. If demonstrated, this might suggest the need to develop specific guidelines to standardize practice. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study (2016-2021) was performed at 12 Level-I/II trauma centers. Adult (≥18 years old) PTPs involved in MVCs were included, with no patients excluded. The primary outcome was the frequency of CT. Chi-square tests were used to compare categorical variables, and ANOVA was used to compare the means of normally distributed continuous variables. RESULTS: A total of 729 PTPs sustained MVCs (73% at high speed of ≥ 25 miles per hour). Most patients were mildly injured but a small variation of injury severity score (range 1.1-4.6, p < 0.001) among centers was observed. There was a variation of imaging rates for CT head (range 11.8-62.5%, p < 0.001), cervical spine (11.8-75%, p < 0.001), chest (4.4-50.2%, p < 0.001), and abdomen/pelvis (0-57.3%, p < 0.001). In high-speed MVCs, there was variation for CT head (12.5-64.3%, p < 0.001), cervical spine (16.7-75%, p < 0.001), chest (5.9-83.3%, p < 0.001), and abdomen/pelvis (0-60%, p < 0.001). There was no difference in mortality (0-2.9%, p =0.19). CONCLUSION: Significant variability of CT imaging in PTPs after MVCs was demonstrated across 12 trauma centers, supporting the need for standardization of CT imaging for PTPs to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure while ensuring optimal injury identification is achieved.

Exploring the role of endovascular interventions in blunt carotid and vertebral artery trauma.

BACKGROUND: The role of endovascular interventions (EI) for blunt carotid and vertebral artery injuries (BCI and BVI) is poorly defined. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of EI compared with antithrombotic therapy (AT) to inform future prospective study. METHODS: Retrospective review (2017-2022) of records at a Level I trauma center to determine injury, treatment, and outcome information. Primary outcome was stroke. RESULTS: 96 patients suffered 106 injuries (74 BVI, 32 BCI). 12 patients underwent 13 EI- 4 therapeutic, 9 prophylactic. Stroke occurred in 12 patients- 6 who had EI. In grade IV BVI, stroke rates are low with both EI and AT. Thrombectomy after stroke improved neurologic function in 4 (100%) of 4 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Most strokes occur prior to preventive therapy. Neither AT nor EI is 100% effective in preventing stroke. Thrombectomy may improve neurologic outcomes after stroke. Prospective multicenter study is imperative.

Outcomes for advanced aged (35 and older) versus younger aged pregnant trauma patients: A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Effects of advanced maternal age (AMA) pregnancies (defined as ≥35 years) on pregnant trauma patients (PTPs) are unknown. This study compared AMA versus younger PTPs, hypothesizing AMA PTPs have increased risk of fetal delivery (FD). METHODS: A retrospective (2016-2021) multicenter study included all PTPs. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate risk of FD after trauma. RESULTS: A total of 950 PTPs were included. Both cohorts had similar gestational age and injury severity scores. The AMA group had increased injuries to the pancreas, bladder, and stomach (p < 0.05). There was no difference in rate or associated risk of FD between cohorts (5.3% vs. 11.4%; OR 0.59, CI 0.19-1.88, p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Compared to their younger counterparts, some intra-abdominal injuries (pancreas, bladder, and stomach) were more common among AMA PTPs. However, there was no difference in rate or associated risk of FD in AMA PTPs, thus they do not require increased observation.

Pain management on a trauma service: a crisis reveals opportunities.

Objectives: The opioid crisis has forced an examination of opioid prescribing and usage patterns. Multimodal pain management and limited, procedure-specific prescribing guidelines have been proposed in general surgery but are less well studied in trauma, where multisystem injuries and multispecialty caregivers are the norm. We hypothesized that opioid requirements would differ by primary type of injury and by age, and we sought to identify factors affecting opioid prescribing at discharge (DC). Methods: Retrospective analysis of pain management at a level II trauma center for January-November 2018. Consecutive patients with exploratory laparotomy (LAP); 3 or more rib fractures (fxs) (RIB); or pelvic (PEL), femoral (FEM), or tibial (TIB) fxs were included, and assigned to cohorts based on the predominant injury. Patients who died or had head Abbreviated Injury Scale >2 and Glasgow Coma Scale <15 were excluded. All pain medications were recorded daily; doses were converted to oral morphine equivalents (OMEs). The primary outcomes of interest were OMEs administered over the final 72 hours of hospitalization (OME72) and prescribed at DC (OMEDC). Multimodal pain therapy defined as 3 or more drugs used. Categorical variables and continuous variables were analyzed with appropriate statistical analyses. Results: 208 patients were included: 17 LAP, 106 RIB, 31 PEL, 26 FEM, and 28 TIB. 74% were male and 8% were using opiates prior to admission. Injury cohorts varied by age but not Injury Severity Score (ISS) or length of stay (LOS). 64% of patients received multimodal pain therapy. There was an overall difference in OME72 between the five injury groups (p<0.0001) and OME72 was lower for RIB compared with all other cohorts. Compared with younger (age <65) patients, older (≥65 years) patients had similar ISS and LOS, but lower OME72 (45 vs 135*) and OMEDC. Median OME72 differed significantly between older and younger patients with PEL (p=0.02) and RIB (p=0.01) injuries. No relationship existed between OMEDC across injury groups, by sex or injury severity. Patients were discharged almost exclusively by trauma service advanced practice clinicians (APCs). There was no difference among APCs in number of pills or OMEs prescribed. 81% of patients received opioids at DC, of whom 69% were prescribed an opioid/acetaminophen combination drug; and only 13% were prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 19% acetaminophen, and 31% gabapentin. Conclusions: Opioid usage varied among patients with different injury types. Opioid DC prescribing appears rote and does not correlate with actual opioid usage during the 72 hours prior to DC. Paradoxically, OMEDC tends to be higher among females, patients with ISS <16, and those with rib fxs, despite a tendency toward lower OME72 usage among these groups. There was apparent underutilization of non-opioid agents. These findings highlight opportunities for improvement and further study. Level of evidence: IV.

Self-inflicted injury and the older trauma patient: a 20 year review of suicide attempts and outcomes.

PURPOSE: Older patients (Older) have complex health management needs often requiring additional resources. Mental health disorders are common among trauma patients, yet minimal information on older suicidal related injury and outcomes exists. A review of trauma patients with intentional self-inflicted injury at one trauma center was done to describe and identify unique elements of this cohort of patients. METHODS: Trauma registry data from 2000 to 2019 were reviewed for intentional injury and data abstracted included demographics, injury severity, diagnoses, comorbidities and outcomes. Cohorts by age were compared: Older (65 +) vs Younger (< 65). Values considered significant at p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: 557 suicide attempts were identified with 9% among Older patients. Most patients were male with median age of 75 years for Older and 35 years for Younger cohort, with similar length of stay (LOS) and injury severity scores (ISS). Penetrating injury was more common among Older patients with firearm used most often, 34% vs 14% for Younger. Differences were evident between male and female Older patients with ISS 16.7 vs 5, p < 0.01 and mortality, p = 0.03. The outcome of discharge to home was significantly different between Older and Younger, 6% vs 20% (p < 0.05). A difference in mortality was evident, Older 38% vs Younger 18% (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: With the growing aging population, it is important to acknowledge the resultant increase in concomitant mental health issues and suicidality among older patients, where depression may be undiagnosed and untreated. Providing care within this cohort may reduce future attempts and lessen the burden on the health care system.

Multi-center validation of the Bowel Injury Predictive Score (BIPS) for the early identification of need to operate in blunt bowel and mesenteric injuries.

INTRODUCTION: The Bowel Injury Prediction Score (BIPS) is a tool for identifying patients at risk for blunt bowel and mesenteric injury (BBMI) requiring surgery. BIPS is calculated by assigning one point for each of the following: (1) WBC ≥ 17,000, (2) abdominal tenderness, and (3) injury grade ≥ 4 (mesenteric contusion or hematoma with bowel wall thickening or adjacent interloop fluid collection) on CT scan. A total score ≥ 2 is associated with BBMI requiring surgery. We aimed to validate the BIPS as a predictor for patients with BBMIs requiring operative intervention in a multi-center prospective study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were prospectively enrolled at 15 U.S. trauma centers following blunt trauma with suspicion of BBMI on CT scan between July 1, 2018 and July 31, 2019. The BIPS was calculated for each patient enrolled in the study. RESULTS: Of 313 patients, 38% had BBMI requiring operative intervention. Patients were significantly more likely to require surgery in the presence of abdominal tenderness (OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.6-8.0) and CT grade ≥ 4 (OR, 11.7; 95% CI, 5.7-23.7). Patients with a BIPS ≥ 2 were more than ten times more likely to require laparotomy than those with a BIPS < 2 (OR, 10.1; 95% CI, 5.0-20.4). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of a BIPS ≥ 2 for BBMI requiring surgery was 72% (CI 0.6-0.8), 78% (CI 0.7-0.8), 67% (CI 0.6-0.8), and 82% (CI 0.8-0.9), respectively. The AUROC curve for BIPS ≥ 2 was 0.75. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of a BIPS ≥ 2 for BBMI requiring surgery in patients with severe alteration in mental status (GCS 3-8) was 70% (CI 0.5-0.9), 92% (CI 0.8-1.0), 82% (CI 0.6-1.0), and 86% (CI 0.7-1.0), respectively. CONCLUSION: This prospective multi-center trial validates BIPS as a predictor of BBMI requiring surgery. Calculation of BIPS during the initial evaluation of trauma patients is a useful adjunct to help general surgeons taking trauma call determine operative versus non-operative management of patients with BBMI including those with severe alteration in mental status.

Trauma resource pit stop: increasing efficiency in the evaluation of lower severity trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Overtriage of trauma patients is unavoidable and requires effective use of hospital resources. A 'pit stop' (PS) was added to our lowest tier trauma resource (TR) triage protocol where the patient stops in the trauma bay for immediate evaluation by the emergency department (ED) physician and trauma nursing. We hypothesized this would allow for faster diagnostic testing and disposition while decreasing cost. METHODS: We performed a before/after retrospective comparison after PS implementation. Patients not meeting trauma activation (TA) criteria but requiring trauma center evaluation were assigned as a TR for an expedited PS evaluation. A board-certified ED physician and trauma/ED nurse performed an immediate assessment in the trauma bay followed by performance of diagnostic studies. Trauma surgeons were readily available in case of upgrade to TA. We compared patient demographics, Injury Severity Score, time to physician evaluation, time to CT scan, hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. Comparisons were made using 95% CI for variance and SD and unpaired t-tests for two-tailed p values, with statistical difference, p<0.05. RESULTS: There were 994 TAs and 474 TRs in the first 9 months after implementation. TR's preanalysis versus postanalysis of the TR group shows similar mean door to physician evaluation times (6.9 vs. 8.6 minutes, p=0.1084). Mean door to CT time significantly decreased (67.7 vs. 50 minutes, p<0.001). 346 (73%) TR patients were discharged from ED; 2 (0.4%) were upgraded on arrival. When admitted, TR patients were older (61.4 vs. 47.2 years, p<0.0001) and more often involved in a same-level fall (59.5% vs. 20.1%, p<0.0001). Undertriage was calculated using the Cribari matrix at 3.2%. DISCUSSION: PS implementation allowed for faster door to CT time for trauma patients not meeting activation criteria without mobilizing trauma team resources. This approach is safe, feasible, and simultaneously decreases hospital cost while improving allocation of trauma team resources. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, economic/decision therapeutic/care management study.

Disparities in triage and management of the homeless and the elderly trauma patient.

BACKGROUND: Trauma systems are designed to provide specialized treatment for the most severely injured. As populations change, it is imperative for trauma centers to remain dynamic to provide the best care to all members of the community. METHODS: A retrospective review of all trauma patients treated at one Level II trauma center in Southern CA over 5 years. Three cohorts of patients were studied: geriatric (> 65 years), the homeless, and all other trauma patients. Triage, hospitalization, and outcomes were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Of 8431 patients treated, 30% were geriatric, 3% homeless and 67% comprised all other patients. Trauma activation criteria was met for 84% of all other trauma patients, yet only 61% of homeless and geriatric patients combined. Injury mechanism for homeless included falls (38%), pedestrian/bicycle related (27%) and assaults (24%), often while under the influence of alcohol and drugs. Average length of hospital stay (LOS) was greater for homeless and geriatric patients and frequently attributed to discharge planning challenges. Both the homeless and geriatric groups demonstrated increased complications, comorbidities, and death rates. CONCLUSIONS: Homeless trauma patients reflect similar challenges in care as with the elderly, requiring additional resources and more complex case management. It is prudent to identify and understand the issues surrounding patients transported to our trauma center requiring a higher level of care yet are under-triaged upon arrival to the Emergency Department. Although a monthly review is done for all under-triaged patients, and geriatric patients are acknowledged to be a cohort continually having delays, the homeless cohort continues to be under-triaged. The admitted homeless trauma patient has similar complex case management issues as the elderly related to pre-existing health issues and challenges with discharge planning, both which can add to longer lengths of hospital stay as compared to other trauma patients. Given the lack of social support that is endemic to both populations, these cohorts represent a unique challenge to trauma centers. Further research into specialized care is required to determine best practices to address disparities evident in the homeless and elderly, and to promote health equity in marginalized populations.