Prehospital notification of injured patients presenting to a trauma centre in India: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of a mobile phone application for prehospital notification on resuscitation and patient outcomes. DESIGN: Longitudinal prospective cohort study with preintervention and postintervention cohorts. SETTING: Major trauma centre in India. PARTICIPANTS: Injured patients being transported by ambulance and allocated to red (highest) and yellow (medium) triage categories. INTERVENTION: A prehospital notification application for use by ambulance and emergency clinicians to notify emergency departments (EDs) of an impending arrival of a patient requiring advanced lifesaving care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of eligible patients arriving at the hospital for which prehospital notification occurred. Secondary outcomes were the availability of a trauma cubicle, presence of a trauma team on patient arrival, time to first chest X-ray, and ED and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Data from January 2017 to January 2018 were collected with 208 patients in the preintervention and 263 patients in the postintervention period. The proportion of patients arriving after prehospital notification improved from 0% to 11% (p<0.001). After the intervention, more patients were managed with a trauma call-out (relative risk (RR) 1.30; 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.52); a trauma bay was ready for more patients (RR 1.47; 95% CI: 1.05 to 2.05) and a trauma team leader present for more patients (RR 1.50; 95% CI: 1.07 to 2.10). There was no difference in time to the initial chest X-ray (p=0.45). There was no association with mortality at hospital discharge (RR 0.94; 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.23), but the intervention was associated with significantly less risk of patients dying in the ED (RR 0.11; 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.39). CONCLUSIONS: The prehospital notification application for severely injured patients had limited uptake but implementation was associated with improved trauma reception and reduction in early deaths. Quality improvement efforts with ongoing data collection using the trauma registry are indicated to drive improvements in trauma outcomes in India. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02877342.

Establishing a Multicentre Trauma Registry in India: An Evaluation of Data Completeness.

BACKGROUND: The completeness of a trauma registry's data is essential for its valid use. This study aimed to evaluate the extent of missing data in a new multicentre trauma registry in India and to assess the association between data completeness and potential predictors of missing data, particularly mortality. METHODS: The proportion of missing data for variables among all adults was determined from data collected from 19 April 2016 to 30 April 2017. In-hospital physiological data were defined as missing if any of initial systolic blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, or Glasgow Coma Scale were missing. Univariable logistic regression and multivariable logistic regression, using manual stepwise selection, were used to investigate the association between mortality (and other potential predictors) and missing physiological data. RESULTS: Data on the 4466 trauma patients in the registry were analysed. Out of 59 variables, most (n = 51; 86.4%) were missing less than 20% of observations. There were 808 (18.1%) patients missing at least one of the first in-hospital physiological observations. Hospital death was associated with missing in-hospital physiological data (adjusted OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.02-2.01; p = 0.04). Other significant associations with missing data were: patient arrival time out of hours, hospital of care, 'other' place of injury, and specific injury mechanisms. Assault/homicide injury intent and occurrence of chest X-ray were associated with not missing any of first in-hospital physiological variables. CONCLUSION: Most variables were well collected. Hospital death, a proxy for more severe injury, was associated with missing first in-hospital physiological observations. This remains an important limitation for trauma registries.

Protocol for a prospective observational study to improve prehospital notification of injured patients presenting to trauma centres in India.

INTRODUCTION: Prehospital notification of injured patients enables prompt and timely care in hospital through adequate preparation of trauma teams, space, equipment and consumables necessary for resuscitation, and may improve outcomes. In India, anecdotal reports suggest that prehospital notification, in those few places where it occurs, is unstructured and not linked to a well-defined hospital response. The aim of this manuscript is to describe, in detail, a study protocol for the evaluation of a formalised approach to prehospital notification. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a longitudinal prospective cohort study of injured patients being transported by ambulance to major trauma centres in India. In the preintervention phase, prospective data on patients will be collected on prehospital assessment, notification, inhospital assessment, management and outcomes and recorded in a new tailored multihospital trauma registry. All injured patients arriving by ambulance and allocated to a red or yellow priority category will be eligible for inclusion. The intervention will be a prehospital notification application to be used by ambulance clinicians to notify emergency departments of the impending arrival of a patient. The proportion of eligible patients arriving to hospital after notification will be the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes evaluated will be availability of a trauma cubicle, presence of a trauma team on patient arrival, time to first chest X-ray and inhospital mortality. PROGRESS: Ethical approval has been obtained from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi and site-specific approval granted by relevant trauma services. The trial has also been registered with the Monash University Human Research and Ethics Committee; Project number: CF16/1814 - 2016000929. Results will be fed back to prehospital and hospital clinicians via a series of reports and presentations. These will be used to facilitate discussions about service redesign and implementation. It is expected that evidence for improved outcomes will enable widespread adoption of this intervention among centres in all settings with less established tools for prehospital assessment and notification. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02877342; Pre-results.

Prehospital notification for major trauma patients requiring emergency hospital transport: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to determine the effect of prehospital notification systems for major trauma patients on overall (<30 days) and early (<24 hours) mortality, hospital reception, and trauma team presence (or equivalent) on arrival, time to critical interventions, and length of hospital stay. METHODS: Experimental and observational studies of prehospital notification compared with no notification or another type of notification in major trauma patients requiring emergency transport were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane ACROBAT-NRSI tool. A narrative synthesis was conducted and evidence quality rated using the GRADE criteria. RESULTS: Three observational studies of 72,423 major trauma patients were included. All were conducted in high-income countries in hospitals with established trauma services, with two studies undertaking retrospective analysis of registry data. Two studies reported overall mortality, one demonstrating a reduction in mortality; (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 0.94, 72,073 participants); and the other demonstrating a nonsignificant change (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.64, 81 participants). The quality of this evidence was rated as very low. CONCLUSION: Limited research on the topic constrains conclusive evidence on the effect of prehospital notification on patient-centered outcomes after severe trauma. Composite interventions that combine prehospital notification with effective actions on arrival to hospital such as trauma bay availability, trauma team presence, and early access to definitive management may provide more robust evidence towards benefits of early interventions during trauma reception and resuscitation.