Predictors of mortality among older major trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Older trauma patients have a higher mortality yet are more likely to be under-triaged compared to younger patients. Studies have suggested that current trauma team activation criteria are suboptimal for older patients. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to describe trauma care delivered, patient outcomes, and to identify variables independently associated with mortality. METHODS: We performed a health records review from 2014 to 2020 of older (age ≥ 65 years) trauma patients presenting to a level one trauma centre with any of the following: injury severity score (ISS) > 12, and all trauma team activations or admission to the trauma ward. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included injury mechanism and trauma care delivered. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors independently associated with 30-day all-cause mortality. Multiple imputation was used to deal with missing data. RESULTS: We enrolled 1,380 patients (mean age 80 years, mean ISS 18); 26.8% had multimorbidity (≥ 2 chronic conditions) and 65.9% met criteria for polypharmacy (≥ 5 medications). The most common mechanism was fall from standing height (61.1%). Thirty-day all-cause mortality occurred in 239 (17.3%) patients. A Glasgow coma scale (GCS) < 15 (odds ratio [OR] = 5.55; 95% CI 3.73-8.24), ISS > 15 (OR = 3.75, 95% CI 2.35-6.01), age ≥ 85 years (OR = 2.04, 95% CI 1.29-3.22), anticoagulation with a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) or warfarin (OR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.08-2.35) and multimorbidity (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.06-2.22) were significantly associated with increased risk 30-day mortality (C-statistic = 0.82, 95% CI 0.79-0.85). Dementia (OR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.95) and time to CT scan > 60 min (OR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.74) were associated with decreased mortality risk. CONCLUSION: We identified five factors associated with increased 30-day mortality in older trauma patients: GCS < 15, ISS > 15, age ≥ 85 years, anticoagulation, and multimorbidity. These factors should be considered when developing modified trauma team activation criteria for older adults.

ABSTRAIT: CONTEXTE: Les patients traumatisés âgés ont une mortalité plus élevée, mais sont plus susceptibles d'être sous-triés que les patients plus jeunes. Des études ont suggéré que les critères actuels d'activation des équipes de traumatologie sont sous-optimaux pour les patients âgés. OBJECTIFS: L'objectif était de décrire les soins traumatologiques dispensés, les résultats pour les patients et d'identifier les variables associées indépendamment à la mortalité. MéTHODES: De 2014 à 2020, nous avons effectué un examen des dossiers médicaux de patients de plus de 65 ans qui ont subi un traumatisme et qui se sont présentés à un centre de traumatologie de niveau 1 avec l'un ou l'autre des éléments suivants: le score de gravité de la blessure (SSI) > 12, et toutes les activations de l'équipe de traumatologie ou l'admission au service de traumatologie. Le critère de jugement principal était la mortalité toutes causes confondues de 30 jours. Les critères de jugement secondaires comprenaient le mécanisme de blessure et les soins prodigués en cas de traumatisme. La régression logistique multivariée a été utilisée pour identifier les facteurs indépendamment associés à la mortalité toutes causes confondues sur 30 jours. L'imputation multiple a été utilisée pour traiter les données manquantes. RéSULTATS: Nous avons recruté 1380 patients (âge moyen 80 ans, SSI moyenne 18); 26.8% avaient une multimorbidité (2 maladies chroniques) et 65.9% répondaient aux critères de polypharmacie (5 médicaments). Le mécanisme le plus courant était la chute de la hauteur debout (61.1%). Une mortalité toutes causes confondues sur 30 jours est survenue chez 239 (17.3%) patients. Une échelle de coma de Glasgow (GCS) < 15 (rapport de cotes [OR] = 5.55; 95% CI 3.73­8.24), ISS > 15 (OR = 3.75, 95% CI 2.35­6.01), âge 85 ans (OR = 2.04, 95% CI 1.29­3.22), anticoagulation avec un anticoagulant oral direct (DOAC) ou la warfarine (RC = 1.59, IC à 95%, de 1,08 à 2.35) et la multimorbidité (RC = 1.53, IC à 95%, de 1.06 à 2.22) étaient significativement associées à un risque accru de mortalité à 30 jours (C-statistic = 0.82, IC à 95%, de 0.79 à 0.85). Démence (RC = 0.61, IC à 95%, 0.40 à 0.95) le temps de TDM > 60 min (OR = 0.50, IC à 95%, 0.34 à 0.74) était associé à une diminution du risque de mortalité.

Injury prevention in medical education: a Canadian medical school survey.

BACKGROUND: Injury has a major societal impact. In Canada, injury is the leading cause of death among those aged 1-44 years, the fifth-leading cause of death among those of all ages and is responsible for a burden of US$26.8 billion in 2010. It holds that most injuries are predictable and preventable, and therefore, such statistics represent a serious public health concern. Given that physicians play a vital role in the prevention and control of injuries, further information regarding the current state of injury prevention education in medical undergraduate programmes in Canada would be beneficial. We hypothesise that the results of an observational survey distribute to all Canadian medical schools will demonstrate a substantial gap in injury prevention education integration in the existing medical school curriculums. STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current status of Injury Prevention Education in Canadian Medical Schools preclerkship and clerkship medical curriculum. METHODS: Electronic surveys evaluating the current status of injury prevention education were sent via email to each of the 16 Canadian medical schools. RESULTS: Nine Canadian medical faculties (56%, n=9) responded. Eight of the nine medical schools (88.89%, n=8) offered at least five injury prevention related topics in their respective curricula. The most common injury-related courses were Role of physicians in the prevention of injuries (100%, n=9) and epidemiology of injury (88.89%, n=8). All respondent medical faculties (100%, n=9) offered at least a single injury prevention specific topic in their curricula. Most surveyed medical faculties (88.89%, n=8) offered nine injury-specific topics. The most common injury-specific topics included falls, suicide and self-harm, alcohol, burns and scalds, and concussion (100%, n=9).

Impact of a geriatric consultation service on outcomes in older trauma patients: a before-after study.

PURPOSE: Early geriatric involvement is recommended for older trauma patients. We wished to determine the impact of geriatric consultation on mortality, hospital length of stay and discharge disposition in older patients who were admitted to our Level 1 trauma unit. METHODS: We completed a health records review of trauma unit patients, age ≥ 75 years old with Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 12, before (11/2015-10/2017) and after (11/2017-10/2019) implementation of a geriatric trauma consultation initiative. Primary outcomes were mortality, hospital length of stay and discharge destination. Secondary objectives were adherence to the geriatric trauma consult process and identification of geriatric-specific issues. A multivariable analysis controlling for age, gender, multi-morbidity and ISS was undertaken. RESULTS: 157 patients pre-implementation and 172 post-implementation with mean age 83.8 years and 53.8% females were included. Geriatric consultation had no impact on in-hospital mortality [OR 0.70 (95% CI 0.31-1.58)] or length of stay [ß 0.68 (95%CI - 1.35-2.72)]. Patients who received a geriatric consultation were more likely to be discharged home (OR 2.01 (95% CI 1.24-3.24). The adherence to consultation process was 99.4%. Mobility, pain and cognitive impairment were the most common geriatric concerns, identified in 76.6, 61.1 and 50.0% of older trauma patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Older trauma patients that receive geriatric trauma consultation are more likely to be discharged home. Collaboration between trauma and geriatric specialists is beneficial and may lead to meaningful improvements in outcomes for older trauma patients.

Financial implications of trauma patients at a Canadian level 1 trauma center: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Trauma is a cause of significant morbidity and mortality globally, and patients with major trauma require specialized settings for multidisciplinary care. We sought to enumerate the variability of costs of caring for patients at a Canadian level 1 trauma center. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all adult patients admitted to The Ottawa Hospital trauma service between June 2013 and June 2018 was conducted. Hospital costs and clinical data were collected. Descriptive statistics and multivariable regression analysis using generalized linear model were performed to assess cost variation with patient characteristics. Quintile-based analyses were used to characterize patients in different cost categories. Hospital costs were reported in 2018 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: A total of 2381 admissions were identified in the 5-year cohort. The mean age of patients was 50.2 years, the mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 18.7, the mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score was 0.35, and the median total cost was $10 048.54. ISS and CCI score were associated with higher costs (ISS >15; p<0.0001). The most expensive mechanisms of injury (MOIs) were those involving heavy machinery (median total cost $24 074.38), pedestrians involved in road traffic collisions ($20 965.45), patients in motor vehicle collisions ($17 621.01) and motorcycle collisions ($16 220.89), and acts of self-injury ($13 903.69). Patients who experienced in-hospital adverse events were associated with higher costs (p<0.0001). Our multivariable regression analysis showed variation in costs related to male gender, penetrating/violent MOI, ISS, adverse hospital events, CCI score, urgent admission status, hospital 1-year mortality risk score, and alternate level of care designation (p<0.05). Quintile-based analyses demonstrated clinically significant differences between the highest and lowest cost groups. DISCUSSION: Major trauma was associated with high hospital costs. Modifiable and non-modifiable patient factors were shown to correlate with differing total hospital costs. These findings can aid in the development of funding strategies and resource allocation for this complex patient population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III evidence for economic and value-based evaluations.

A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating geriatric consultation on older trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Early involvement of geriatrics is recommended for older trauma patients. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to determine the impact of a geriatric assessment on mortality, hospital length of stay, discharge destination, and delirium incidence in patients 65 years and older admitted to a trauma center. METHODS: The protocol was developed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019131870). Search of five databases was completed April 2019. Two independent reviewers completed screening, full text review, and data abstraction. Meta-analysis was performed on outcomes with at least two studies. RESULTS: A total of 928 unique citations were identified; eight were included in the final analysis. All were cohort studies, most of moderate to poor quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We found hospital length of stay decreased by mean of 1.11 days (95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.43), but mortality was unchanged (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-1.38) in older patients admitted to a trauma center who had a geriatric consultation. Meta-analysis of discharge destination and delirium incidence was not performed due to heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate outcomes in older patients admitted to a trauma center after implementation of a geriatric trauma consultation service. We found a decrease in hospital length of stay but insufficient evidence of change in in-hospital mortality in older patients who received a geriatric consultation as part of their trauma care compared with those that received standard trauma care only. There is a need for more methodologically rigorous research in geriatric trauma. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, level III.

Injury Prevention in Medical Education: A Systematic Literature Review.

OBJECTIVE: Traumatic injury is the first cause of death for Canadians aged 1 to 44 years old. To reduce the global burden of injury, the need for healthcare professionals with injury prevention proficiency is growing. The aim of this study was to review the literature to identify and analyze current injury prevention curriculums amongst medical undergraduate and residency programs. DESIGN: A systematic literature review (no date restriction was used) was conducted using Embase, Medline, ERIC, and CINAHL. Three reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, checked accuracy, assessed risk of bias, and assessed quality. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guideline was followed. The study was registered with PROSPERO, #CRD42016048805. PARTICIPANTS: Articles were included if they were peer-reviewed, published in the English language, and reported data on injury prevention and control curriculum. RESULTS: Eight hundred and twenty-four articles were identified with the initial search strategy. Internal consistency reliability, generalizability, evidence for content, criterion-related and construct validity was performed. The systematic review synthesized the characteristics (population, intervention type, outcome measures) described in the literature. This review is the first step in identifying gaps in injury prevention teaching and curriculums for medical students and residents. CONCLUSION: The number of studies reporting the incidence and/or effectiveness of injury prevention and control curriculum is limited across the literature. Therefore, there is a knowledge gap in providing injury prevention education. Given that physicians play a vital role in the prevention or control of injuries, further development of medical undergraduate and residency programs to include core concepts of injury prevention would be unquestionably paramount.