More fateful than fruitful? Intracranial pressure monitoring in elderly patients with traumatic brain injury is associated with worse outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In an expanding elderly population, traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains a significant cause of death and disability. Guidelines for management of TBI, according to the Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF), include intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. Whether ICP monitoring contributes to outcomes in the elderly patients with TBI has not been explored. METHODS: This is a retrospective study extracted from the National Trauma Database 2007-2008 research datasets. Patients were included if aged >55 y and they met BTF indications for ICP monitoring. Patients that had nonsurvivable injuries (any body region, abbreviated injury score = 6), were dead on arrival, had withdrawal of care, or length of stay <48 h were excluded. Outcomes were then stratified based on ICP monitoring. The primary outcomes were inhospital mortality and favorable discharge. Logistic regression was used to analyze the effect of ICP monitoring on outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 4437 patients were included with 11.2% having an ICP monitor placed. Patients requiring an ICP monitor were younger overall, more likely to present hypertensive, had higher injury severity, and more likely to require operative intervention. Median initial Glasgow coma scale (3) was similar between groups. Of those patients with ICP monitoring, overall mortality was significantly higher, and they were less likely to have favorable discharge status. Craniotomy itself was not associated with increased mortality (P = 0.450). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the use of ICP monitoring according to BTF guidelines in elderly TBI patients does not provide outcomes superior to treatment without monitoring. The ideal group to benefit from ICP monitor placement remains to be elucidated.

Does unit designation matter? A dedicated trauma intensive care unit is associated with lower postinjury complication rates and death after major complication.

BACKGROUND: Recent data suggest that specialty intensive care units (ICUs) have outcomes better than those of mixed ICUs. The cause for this apparent discrepancy has not been well established. We hypothesized that trauma patients admitted to a dedicated trauma ICU (TICU) would have a lower complication rate as well as death after complication (failure to rescue [FTR]). METHODS: This was a retrospective review of the ICUs of two Level I trauma centers covered by one group of surgical intensivists. One center has a dedicated TICU, while the other has a mixed ICU. Demographic and clinical characteristics were stratified into TICU and ICU groups. The primary outcomes were postinjury complications and FTR. Multivariate regression was used to derive factors associated with complications and FTR. RESULTS: During the 5-year study period, 3,833 patients were analyzed. TICU patients were older (57.8 vs. 47.0 years, p < 0.0001), had higher Charlson score (2 vs. 1, p = 0.001), had more severe head injuries (Head Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] score ≥ 3, 50.0% vs. 37.5%, p < 0.0001), and had greater injury burden (Injury Severity Score [ISS] > 16, 49.6% vs. 38.6%, p < 0.0001) than those admitted to the mixed ICU. Need for immediate operative intervention was similar (18.0% vs. 17.6%, p = 0.788). Overall complications were significantly higher in trauma patients admitted to the mixed ICU (27.5% vs. 17.0%, p < 0.0001), as well as FTR (3.7% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.0001). Trauma patients admitted to a dedicated TICU had significantly lower chance of developing a postinjury complication (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.5; p < 0.0001), FTR (AOR, 0.3; p < 0.0001), and overall mortality (AOR, 0.4; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Admission of critically ill trauma patients to a TICU staffed by a surgical intensivist is associated with a lower complication rate and FTR. Factors such as trauma nursing experience, education, and unit management structure should be further explored to elucidate the observed improved outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level III.

Probable cause in helicopter emergency medical services crashes: what role does ownership play?

BACKGROUND: The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) ranks helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) as one of the most perilous occupations in the United States, with improvements in its safety of highest priority. As many injured patients are transported by helicopter, this is of particular concern to the trauma community. The use of HEMS is associated with a heightened degree of inherent risk. We hypothesized that this risk is not uniform and varies with the entity providing HEMS, specifically, commercial versus public safety providers. METHODS: The NTSB accident database was queried to identify all HEMS-involved events for the 15-year period 1998 to 2012. The NTSB investigation report was reviewed to obtain crash details including probable cause. These were analyzed on the basis of HEMS ownership. Statistical analyses were performed using analysis of variance and Fisher's exact test as appropriate. RESULTS: During the study period, 139 (6.8%) of 2,040 crashes involved HEMS and occurred across 134 cities in 37 states, killing 120 and seriously injuring 146. Of these, 118 involved commercial, 14 not-for-profit, and 7 public safety HEMS. Analyzed in 5-year blocks, no decrease in crash incidence was seen (p = 0.7, analysis of variance). Human and pilot errors were significantly more common among commercial HEMS compared with public safety HEMS (91 of 118 vs. 2 of 7, p = 0.013, and 75 of 116 vs. 1 of 7, p = 0.017, Fisher's exact test). Conditions for which training was not adequate, limited resources, inadequate equipment, and the undertaking of suboptimal trips were identified as key factors. Trauma patients were involved in 34 transports (24.5%), with a fatal or serious outcome in 68 crew/patients on 12 flights. CONCLUSION: Potentially preventable human and pilot error-related HEMS crashes are significantly more frequent among commercial compared with public safety providers. Deficiencies in training, reduced availability of equipment and resources, as well as questionable flight selection seem to play a key role. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic study, level III.