Prognostic factors associated with development of infected necrosis in patients with acute necrotizing or severe pancreatitis-A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Acute pancreatitis is a potentially life-threatening condition with a wide spectrum of clinical presentation and illness severity. An infection of pancreatic necrosis (IPN) results in a more than twofold increase in mortality risk as compared with patients with sterile necrosis. We sought to identify prognostic factors for the development of IPN among adult patients with severe or necrotizing pancreatitis. METHODS: We conducted this prognostic review in accordance with systematic review methodology guidelines. We searched six databases from inception through March 21, 2021. We included English language studies describing prognostic factors associated with the development of IPN. We pooled unadjusted odds ratio (uOR) and adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for prognostic factors using a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We included 31 observational studies involving 5,210 patients. Factors with moderate or higher certainty of association with increased IPN risk include older age (uOR, 2.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39-3.45, moderate certainty), gallstone etiology (aOR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.36-4.04, high certainty), greater than 50% necrosis of the pancreas (aOR, 3.61; 95% CI, 2.15-6.04, high certainty), delayed enteral nutrition (aOR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.26-3.47, moderate certainty), multiple or persistent organ failure (aOR, 11.71; 95% CI, 4.97-27.56, high certainty), and invasive mechanical ventilation (uOR, 12.24; 95% CI, 2.28-65.67, high certainty). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis confirms the association between several clinical early prognostic factors and the risk of IPN development among patients with severe or necrotizing pancreatitis. These findings provide the foundation for the development of an IPN risk stratification tool to guide more targeted clinical trials for prevention or early intervention strategies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, Level IV.

The Utility of Carbohydrate-Deficient Transferrin in Identifying Chronic Alcohol Users in the Injured Patient: Expanding the Toolkit.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use remains abundant in patients with traumatic injury. Previous studies have suggested that serum carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (%dCDT) levels, relative to blood alcohol levels (BALs), may better differentiate episodic binge drinkers from sustained heavy consumers in admitted patients with traumatic injury. We characterized %dCDT levels and BAL levels to differentiate binge drinkers from sustained heavy consumers in admitted trauma patients and their associations with outcomes. METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional, observational study assessed %dCDT and BAL levels in admitted male and female patients with traumatic injury (≥18 y) at an American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma level-1 center from July 2014 to June 2016. We designated patients with %dCDT levels ≥1.7% (CDT+) as chronic alcohol users and dichotomized acutely intoxicated patients using three different BAL-level thresholds. Primary outcomes included in-hospital complications, along with prolonged ventilation and intensive care unit length of stay, both defined as the top decile. Secondary outcomes included rates of drug or alcohol withdrawal and all-cause mortality. Analyses were adjusted for clinical factors. RESULTS: We studied 715 patients (77.5% men, 60.6% ≤ 40 y of age, median Injury Severity Score: 14, 41.7% motor vehicle crashes, 17.9% gunshot wounds, 11.1% falls). While 31.0% were CDT+, 48.7% were BAL>0. After adjusting for CDT levels, BAL levels >0, >100, or >200 were not associated with adverse outcomes. However, CDT+ relative to patients with CDT were associated with complications (adjusted odds ratio: 1.96 [1.24-3.09]), prolonged ventilation days (3.23 [1.08-9.65]), and prolonged intensive care unit stays (2.83 [1.20-6.68]). CONCLUSIONS: In this 2-year prospective, cross-sectional, and observational study, we found that %dCDT levels, relative to BAL levels, may better stratify admitted patients with traumatic injury into acute versus chronic alcohol users, identifying those at higher risk for in-hospital complications.

Early identification of the need for major intervention in patients with traumatic hemorrhage: development and internal validation of a simple bleeding score.

BACKGROUND: Failure to rapidly identify bleeding in trauma patients leads to substantial morbidity and mortality. We aimed to develop and validate a simple bedside score for identifying bleeding patients requiring escalation of care beyond initial resuscitation. METHODS: We included patients with major blunt or penetrating trauma, defined as those with an Injury Severity Score greater than 12 or requiring trauma team activation, at The Ottawa Hospital from September 2014 to September 2017. We used logistic regression for derivation. The primary outcome was a composite of the need for massive transfusion, embolization or surgery for hemostasis. We prespecified clinical, laboratory and imaging predictors using findings from our prior systematic review and survey of Canadian traumatologists. We used an AIC-based stepdown procedure based on the Akaike information criterion and regression coefficients to create a 5-variable score for bedside application. We used bootstrap internal validation to assess optimism-corrected performance. RESULTS: We included 890 patients, of whom 133 required a major intervention. The main model comprised systolic blood pressure, clinical examination findings suggestive of hemorrhage, lactate level, focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) and computed tomographic imaging. The C statistic was 0.95, optimism-corrected to 0.94. A simplified Canadian Bleeding (CAN-BLEED) score was devised. A score cut-off of 2 points yielded sensitivity of 97.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 93.6 to 99.5) and specificity 73.2% (95% CI 69.9 to 76.3). An alternative version that included mechanism of injury rather than CT had lower discriminative ability (C statistic = 0.89). CONCLUSION: A simple yet promising bleeding score is proposed to identify highrisk patients in need of major intervention for traumatic bleeding and determine the appropriateness of early transfer to specialized trauma centres. Further research is needed to evaluate the performance of the score in other settings, define interrater reliability and evaluate the potential for reduction of time to intervention.

CONTEXTE: Les délais dans la détection des saignements actifs chez les patients en traumatologie entraînent une morbidité et une mortalité élevées. L'objectif était d'élaborer et de valider une échelle simple, à utiliser en contexte clinique pour repérer les patients qui présentent un saignement actif et qui nécessitent une intensification des soins après la réanimation initiale. MÉTHODES: Les critères d'inclusion étaient les suivants : admission à l'Hôpital d'Ottawa entre septembre 2014 et septembre 2017 pour un traumatisme contondant ou pénétrant, et score de gravité de la blessure supérieur à 12 ou mobilisation de l'équipe de traumatologie. Nous avons fait la dérivation par régression logistique. Le principal critère d'évaluation était la nécessité d'une transfusion massive, d'une embolisation ou d'une opération pour rétablir l'hémostase. Nous avons établi les facteurs prédictifs décelables en clinique, en laboratoire et à l'imagerie en fonction des résultats que nous avons obtenus dans le cadre d'une revue systématique et d'un sondage mené auprès de traumatologues canadiens. Nous avons utilisé une procédure avec ajustement selon le critère d'information d'Akaike (AIC) et des coefficients de régression afin de créer une échelle à 5 variables applicable en contexte clinique. Pour ce qui est de la validation interne, nous avons ajusté les valeurs dites « optimistes ¼ à l'aide de la méthode d'autoamorçage (bootstrap). RÉSULTATS: Nous avons inclus 890 patients, dont 133 nécessitaient une intervention majeure. Le modèle de base intégrait la pression artérielle systolique, les constatations cliniques indiquant une hémorragie, le taux de lactate, les résultats de l'échographie ciblée en traumatologie (FAST) et les résultats de la tomodensitométrie (TMD). La statistique C s'élevait à 0,95 (0,94 après ajustement). Nous avons conçu une échelle canadienne simplifiée d'évaluation des saignements actifs (CANBLEED). Un seuil de 2 points a généré une sensibilité de 97,7 % (intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % de 93,6 à 99,5) et une spécificité de 73,2 % (IC à 95 % de 69,9 à 76,3). Une deuxième version, qui tient compte du mécanisme de blessure plutôt que des résultats de la TMD, avait un pouvoir de discrimination inférieur (statistique C = 0,89). CONCLUSION: Nous proposons une échelle d'évaluation des saignements actifs simple, mais prometteuse. Celle-ci vise à repérer les patients à haut risque qui nécessitent une intervention majeure pour un saignement d'origine traumatique ainsi qu'à déterminer la pertinence d'un transfert précoce dans un centre de traumatologie. Des études complémentaires seront nécessaires afin d'évaluer l'échelle dans d'autres milieux, d'établir sa fiabilité interévaluateurs et d'évaluer le potentiel de réduction des délais d'intervention.

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.

Motor vehicle collision with seatbelt sign and traumatic abdominal wall hernia should raise suspicion for hollow viscus injury.

Diagnosing hollow viscus injury following motor vehicle collision (MVC) requires a high index of suspicion. Here we present two cases of high velocity MVC, with 3-point restrained occupants, who presented with a seatbelt sign and associated acute traumatic flank herniation. Both patients underwent a computer tomography (CT) scan which did not identify any hollow viscus injuries. Significant injuries were ultimately identified in the operating room (OR). The presence of a seatbelt sign and underlying acute traumatic hernia should prompt a heightened level of suspicion for intra-abdominal injury, particularly hollow viscus. A heightened level of suspision and a lower threshold for operative exploration is suggested to avoid the morbidity and mortality associated with a delayed diagnosis of hollow viscus injury.

Point prevalence survey of antibiotic use in 26 Saudi hospitals in 2016.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the antibiotic prescribing trends, qualitatively and quantitatively, among Saudi Ministry of Health (MOH) hospitals. METHOD AND MATERIALS: In May 2016, information about the hospitals and patients was collected for all inpatients from 26 MOH hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Additional information about antibiotic treatment and infections was gathered. Data collection was done using Global Point Prevalence Survey (PPS) tool designed by University of Antwerp, Belgium. RESULTS: A total of 3240 antibiotic doses were administrated to 2182 patients who represented 46.9% of the total eligible admitted patients. Of those patients on antibiotics, 510 (24%) patients were in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), 646 (30.4%) patients were medically treated, and 972 (45.7%) patients were in surgical departments. The most commonly prescribed antibiotic group was third-generation cephalosporin (17.2%) and the most frequent indication was respiratory ract infectiont (n=597; 18.2%). Antibiotics for surgical prophylaxis represented 23.4% of the total antibiotic doses. Of those, 78% were administrated for more than 24hs. The rate of adherence to antibiotic guidelines was 48.1%. The indications for antibiotics were not documented in the patients' notes for 51.1% of the prescriptions. CONCLUSION: This national PPS provided a useful tool to identify targets for quality improvement in order to enhance the prudent use of antibiotics in hospital settings. This survey can provide a background to assess the quality of antibiotic utilisation after any intervention by administering it regularly.

Accuracy of massive transfusion as a surrogate for significant traumatic bleeding in health administrative datasets.

BACKGROUND: Due to the challenge of identifying need for intervention in bleeding patients, there is a growing interest in prediction modeling. Massive transfusion (MT; 10 or more packed red cells in 24 h) is the most commonly studied dependent variable, serving as a surrogate for severe bleeding and its prediction guides the need for intervention. The critical administration threshold (CAT; 3 packed red cells in 1 h) has been proposed as an alternative. In this study, we aim to compare the classification accuracy of these two surrogates for hemorrhage-related outcomes in health administrative datasets. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of major trauma patients from the prospectively collected Ottawa Trauma Registry, from September 2014 to September 2017. We conducted a logistic regression analysis utilizing need for hemostasis or hemorrhagic death as dependent variables. We compared classification accuracy in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and AUC. CAT + and MT + status is not mutually exclusive. RESULTS: We studied 890 major trauma patients, including 145 CAT + and 48 MT + patients. CAT + demonstrated a superior association for the composite outcome of 24-hour hemorrhage-related mortality and need for hemostasis (AUC 0.815 vs. 0.644, p < 0.0001). This performance was driven by a substantial difference in sensitivity, noted to be 70.0% (95% CI 62.1-77.9%) for CAT + but only 30.0% (95% CI 22.1-37.9%) for MT+. CAT + and MT + demonstrated specificities of 92.9% (95% CI 91.1-94.7%) and 98.9% (98.1-99.6%) respectively. CONCLUSION: This study illustrates the concepts of survivorship and competing risk bias for massive transfusion. Utilizing a composite outcome of need for hemostasis and early hemorrhagic death, we demonstrate that CAT + is more accurate for identifying significantly bleeding patients.

Permissive hypotension versus conventional resuscitation strategies in adult trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Aggressive fluid resuscitation in trauma promotes deleterious effects such as clot disruption, dilutional coagulopathy and hypothermia. Animal studies suggest that permissive hypotension maintains appropriate organ perfusion, reduces bleeding and improves mortality. This review assesses the efficacy and safety of permissive hypotension in adult trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to May 2017 for randomized controlled trials comparing permissive hypotension vs. conventional resuscitation following traumatic injury. We included preoperative and intraoperative resuscitation strategies. The primary outcome was 30-day or in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included blood product utilization, estimated blood loss and in-hospital complications. Pooling was performed with a random-effects model. RESULTS: We screened 722 abstracts, from which five randomized trials evaluating 1,158 patients were included. Blood pressure targets in the intervention arms varied from systolic BP 50 mm Hg to 70 mm Hg or mean arterial pressure of 50 mm Hg or higher as compared to systolic BP 65 mm Hg to 100 mm Hg or mean arterial pressure of 65 or higher in the control arms. Two studies evaluated only patients with penetrating injury while the remaining three additionally included blunt injuries. Four trials suggested a survival benefit for 30-day or in-hospital mortality with hypotensive resuscitation, although three studies were insufficiently powered to find statistical significance. Studies were of poor to moderate quality due to poor protocol reporting and lack of blinding. The pooled odds ratio was 0.70 (95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.92), suggesting a survival benefit for permissive hypotension. Those patients received fewer blood products and had lesser estimated blood loss. CONCLUSION: Permissive hypotension may offer a survival benefit over conventional resuscitation for patients with hemorrhagic injury. It may additionally reduce blood loss and blood product utilization. However, the majority of studies were underpowered, thus reflecting a need for high quality, adequately powered trials. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: Systematic Review, level II.CRD42017070526.

Early identification of patients requiring massive transfusion, embolization or hemostatic surgery for traumatic hemorrhage: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Delays in appropriate triage of bleeding trauma patients result in poor outcomes. Clinical gestalt is fallible and objective measures of risk stratification are needed. The objective of this review is to identify and assess prediction models and predictors for the early identification of traumatic hemorrhage patients requiring massive transfusion, surgery, or embolization. METHODS: We searched electronic databases through to September 31, 2016, for studies describing clinical, laboratory, and imaging predictors available within the first hour of resuscitation for identifying patients requiring major intervention for hemorrhage within the first 24 hours. RESULTS: We included 84 studies describing any predictor-outcome association, including 47 multivariable models; of these, 26 (55%) were specifically designed for prediction. We identified 35 distinct predictors of which systolic blood pressure, age, heart rate, and mechanism of injury were most frequently studied. Quality of multivariable models was generally poor with only 21 (45%) meeting a commonly recommended sample size threshold of 10 events per predictor. From 21 models meeting this threshold, we identified seven predictors that were examined in at least two models: mechanism of injury, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, hemoglobin, lactate, and focussed abdominal sonography for trauma. Pooled odds ratios were obtained from random-effects meta-analyses. CONCLUSION: The majority of traumatic hemorrhagic prediction studies are of poor quality, as assessed by the Prognosis Research Strategy recommendations and Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Modeling Studies checklist. There exists a need for a well-designed clinical prediction model for early identification of patients requiring intervention. The variables of clinical importance identified in this review are consistent with recent expert guideline recommendations and may serve as candidates for future derivation studies.

Trauma Education and Prevention.

Trauma education and injury prevention are essential components of a robust trauma program. Educational programs address specific knowledge gaps and provide focused and structured learning. Advanced Trauma Life Support is the most well-known. Each offering seems to be valid, although it has been difficult to prove improved patient care outcomes owing specifically to any of them. Injury prevention offers the best opportunity to limit death and disability owing to trauma. Injury prevention initiatives have paid tremendous dividends in reducing the mortality rates for motor vehicle crashes. Modern injury prevention efforts focus on reducing distracted driver rates and increasing helmet use.

Early identification of patients requiring massive transfusion, embolization, or hemostatic surgery for traumatic hemorrhage: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhage is a major cause of early mortality following a traumatic injury. The progression and consequences of significant blood loss occur quickly as death from hemorrhagic shock or exsanguination often occurs within the first few hours. The mainstay of treatment therefore involves early identification of patients at risk for hemorrhagic shock in order to provide blood products and control of the bleeding source if necessary. The intended scope of this review is to identify and assess combinations of predictors informing therapeutic decision-making for clinicians during the initial trauma assessment. The primary objective of this systematic review is to identify and critically assess any existing multivariable models predicting significant traumatic hemorrhage that requires intervention, defined as a composite outcome comprising massive transfusion, surgery for hemostasis, or angiography with embolization for the purpose of external validation or updating in other study populations. If no suitable existing multivariable models are identified, the secondary objective is to identify candidate predictors to inform the development of a new prediction rule. METHODS: We will search the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases for all randomized controlled trials and prospective and retrospective cohort studies developing or validating predictors of intervention for traumatic hemorrhage in adult patients 16 years of age or older. Eligible predictors must be available to the clinician during the first hour of trauma resuscitation and may be clinical, lab-based, or imaging-based. Outcomes of interest include the need for surgical intervention, angiographic embolization, or massive transfusion within the first 24 h. Data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. Items for extraction will be based on the CHARMS checklist. We will evaluate any existing models for relevance, quality, and the potential for external validation and updating in other populations. Relevance will be described in terms of appropriateness of outcomes and predictors. Quality criteria will include variable selection strategies, adequacy of sample size, handling of missing data, validation techniques, and measures of model performance. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will describe the availability of multivariable prediction models and summarize evidence regarding predictors that can be used to identify the need for intervention in patients with traumatic hemorrhage. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017054589.

Operation versus antibiotics--The "appendicitis conundrum" continues: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis continues to constitute a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. The aim of this study was to synthesize evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing nonoperative versus surgical management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in adult patients. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases was performed with respect to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) statement (end-of-search date: January 29, 2017). Data on the study design, interventions, participants, and outcomes were extracted by two independent reviewers. The random-effects model (DerSimonian-Laird) was used to calculate pooled effect estimates when substantial heterogeneity was encountered; otherwise, the fixed-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) model was implemented. Quality assessment of included RCTs was performed using the modified Jadad scale. RESULTS: Five RCTs were included in this review. Overall, 1,430 adult patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis underwent either nonoperative (n = 727) or operative management (n = 703). Treatment efficacy at 1-year follow-up was significantly lower (63.8%) for antibiotics compared with the surgery group (93%) (risk ratio [RR], 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.77; p < 0.001). Overall complications were significantly higher in the surgery group (166/703 [23.6%]) compared with the antibiotics group (56/727 [7.7%]) (RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.24-0.43; p < 0.001). No difference was found between the two treatment modalities in terms of perforated appendicitis rates (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.14-1.92), length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference [WMD], 0.20; 95% CI, -0.16 to 0.56), duration of pain (WMD, 0.22; 95% CI, -5.30 to -5.73), and sick leave (WMD, -2; 95% CI, -5.2 to 1.1). CONCLUSIONS: Conservative management of uncomplicated appendicitis in adults warrants further study. Addressing patients' expectations via a shared decision-making process is a crucial step in optimizing nonoperative outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review, level II.

Identifying chronic heavy alcohol use in emergency general surgery patients: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic heavy alcohol (CHA) use has been associated with perioperative complications. Emergency general surgery (EGS) patients are not routinely screened for CHA. If screened, it is usually for hazardous use of alcohol, using a survey such as the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). This study screened EGS patients for CHA use using serum carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (%dCDT) level, a biomarker that has been validated as an indicator for CHA use, as well as the AUDIT. The purpose of this study was to determine the percent of EGS patients with CHA (as indicated by elevated %dCDT), and the relationship between %dCDT and AUDIT. Secondary aims included comparing the characteristics of EGS patients with and without CHA use, and evaluating the association of CHA use with negative clinical outcomes. METHODS: EGS patients aged 21 and older admitted to the general surgery inpatient service of a tertiary hospital from July 2014 to June 2016 were invited to participate in this study. %dCDT levels above 1.7% were considered positive for CHA use, as were AUDIT scores ≥8. RESULTS: 195 EGS patients were screened for inclusion and 91 (46.7%) agreed to participate. 14 (15.4%) were positive for hazardous alcohol use on AUDIT and 5 (5.5%) were positive for CHA by %dCDT. Positive predictive value of AUDIT for CHA was 21.4%. There was no correlation between positive scores on AUDIT and %dCDT. DISCUSSION: Identifying at risk patients early on in their hospital course may allow clinicians to institute treatments to mitigate and/or circumvent complications in such patients. This pilot study determined that 17.6% of participating EGS patients were positive for some type of alcohol misuse, but only 5.5% had CHA. Further research is needed to determine whether routine use of %dCDT would be beneficial in reducing perioperative complications in this patient population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III (diagnostic test).

Preinjury ASA score as an independent predictor of readmission after major traumatic injury.

BACKGROUND: Patients with trauma have a high predisposition for readmission after discharge. Unplanned solicitation of medical services is a validated quality of care indicator and is associated with considerable economic costs. While the existing literature emphasizes the severity of the injury, there is heterogeneity in defining preinjury health status. We evaluate the validity of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status score as an independent predictor of readmission and compare it to the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). METHODS: This is a single center, retrospective cohort study based on adult patients (>18 years of age) with trauma admitted to the Ottawa Hospital from January 1, 2004 to November 1, 2014. A multivariate logistic regression model is used to control for confounding and assess individual predictors. Outcome is readmission to hospital within 30 days, 3 months and 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 4732 adult patients were included in this analysis. Readmission rates were 6.5%, 9.6% and 11.8% for 30 days, 3 months and 6 months, respectively. Higher preinjury ASA scores demonstrated significantly increased risk of readmission across all levels in a dose-dependent manner for all time frames. The effect of preinjury ASA scores on readmission is most striking at 30 days, with patients demonstrating a 2.81 (1.88-4.22, P<0.0001), 3.59 (2.43-5.32, P<0.0001) and 7.52 (4.72-11.99, P<0.0001) fold odds of readmission for ASA class 2, 3 and 4, respectively, as compared with healthy ASA class 1 patients. The ASA scores outperformed the CCI at 30 days and 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: The preinjury ASA score is a strong independent predictor of readmission after traumatic injury. In comparison to the CCI, the preinjury ASA score was a better predictor of readmission at 3 and 6 months after a major traumatic injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological Study, Level III.