Penetrating oesophageal injury: a contemporary analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.

BACKGROUND: Oesophageal trauma is uncommon. The aim of this study was to conduct a descriptive analysis of penetrating oesophageal trauma and determine risk factors for oesophageal related complications and mortality in the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB). METHODS: Patients with penetrating oesophageal trauma from Levels 1 and 2 trauma centres in the NTDB (2007 and 2008) that specified how complication and comorbidity data were recorded were selected. Data collected included age, injury severity score (ISS), abbreviated injury scores (AIS), lengths of stay (LOS) and ventilation days, systolic blood pressure (SBP) in the emergency department (ED), comorbidities, oesophageal related procedures, and oesophageal related complications. Univariate and multivariable analyses were conducted to identify significant predictors of oesophageal-related complications and mortality in patients with LOS>24 h. RESULTS: 227 patients from 107 centres were studied. The mean number of patients per centre was 2 (range 1-15). Overall mortality was found to be 44% with 92% of these deaths in less than 24 h. In patients with LOS>24 h, 62% had primary repair, 13% drainage, 4% resection, 1% diversion, and 20% unspecified. No significant difference in mortality was found in patients with oesophageal related complications. The time to first oesophageal related procedure was not significantly different in those with oesophageal related complications or those who died. Significant predictors of oesophageal related complications were age and AIS of the abdomen or pelvic contents ≥3 and the only significant predictor of mortality was ISS. CONCLUSIONS: Most deaths in penetrating oesophageal trauma occur in the first 24 h due to severe associated injuries. Primary repair was the most common intervention, followed by drainage and resection. Oesophageal related complications were not found to significantly increase mortality and time to first oesophageal related procedure did not affect outcomes in this subset of patients from the NTDB.

The effect of dead-on-arrival and emergency department death classification on risk-adjusted performance in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons' Trauma Quality Improvement Program is focused on identifying variations in outcomes across trauma centers for the purposes of performance improvement. In previous analyses, patients who died in the emergency department were excluded. We investigated the effect of inclusion and exclusion of emergency department (ED) deaths (dead on arrival [DOA] and died in ED [DIE]) on analyses of overall risk-adjusted trauma center performance. METHODS: Data for patients admitted to 65 Trauma Quality Improvement Program hospitals during the 2009 calendar year was used. A logistic regression model was developed to estimate risk-adjusted mortality. Trauma centers were then ranked based on their observed-to-expected (O/E) mortality ratio with 90% confidence intervals (CIs) and classified by outlier status: low outliers/high performers had a 90% CI for O/E mortality ratio of less than 1, and high outliers/low performers had a 90% CI for O/E mortality ratio of greater than 1. Changes in outlier status, rank, and quartile were examined with and without DOA and DIE patients included in the analyses to discern the impact of such exclusions on overall risk-adjusted center-specific performance. RESULTS: Thirty-one trauma centers (48%) reported no DOA patients in 2009, while 6 centers (9%) reported more than 10. Of 224 patients, 14 (6.2%) had a documented time of death of more than 30 minutes after ED arrival despite being recorded as DOA. Forty-one trauma centers (63%) changed rank by three positions or less. Ten trauma centers changed their quartile ranking by a single quartile, but no centers were found to change quartile rank more than one quartile. Changes in outlier status occurred for 6 trauma centers (9%). CONCLUSION: The relative frequency of patients classified as DOA varies greatly between trauma centers. Misclassification of patients as DOA occurs. Inclusion of ED deaths in risk-adjusted analysis of mortality results in a small but insignificant change in predicting the outcome results of a trauma center. This change is less than the rate of finding a center to be a high or low outlier by chance alone using the 90% CI. Inclusion of DOA and DIE patients in risk-adjusted analysis of mortality is appropriate and eliminates the bias introduced by exclusion of ED deaths owing to misuse of the DOA classification. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/epidemiologic study, level III.

Duplex ultrasound screening for deep vein thrombosis in asymptomatic trauma patients: a survey of individual trauma surgeon opinions and current trauma center practices.

BACKGROUND: Many national agencies have suggested that deep vein thrombosis (DVT) rates measure quality of hospital care. However, none provide recommendations for standardized screening. If screening practices vary among clinicians or hospitals, DVT rates could be biased-centers which perform more duplex ultrasounds report more DVTs. We hypothesized that trauma surgeons have varying opinions regarding duplex ultrasound screening for DVT in asymptomatic trauma patients, which result in varying practice patterns. METHODS: We conducted two web-based surveys regarding the use of duplex ultrasound screening for DVT in asymptomatic trauma patients. The first (individual provider level) surveyed members of two national trauma surgery organizations (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma and Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma). The second (trauma center level) surveyed practice patterns of National Trauma Data Bank hospitals. RESULTS: Three hundred seventeen individual surgeons completed surveys. There was wide variation in individual opinions regarding DVT screening in asymptomatic trauma patients (53% agree, 36% disagree, and 11% neither agree nor disagree). Two hundred thirteen National Trauma Data Bank hospitals completed surveys of which 28% (n=60) have a written guideline regarding DVT screening in asymptomatic trauma patients. The proportion of centers with a written protocol varied significantly by trauma center level (p<0.001) but not by teaching status. Opinions and practice patterns suggest that screening should start early and be performed weekly. The main risk factors used to suggest DVT screening are spinal cord injury and pelvic fracture. CONCLUSIONS: There are wide variations in trauma surgeons' opinions and trauma centers' practices regarding duplex ultrasound screening for DVT in asymptomatic trauma patients. This variability combined with the fact that performing more duplex ultrasounds finds more DVTs may influence reported DVT rates. DVT rates alone are biased and not reflective of true quality of trauma care.

The attributable mortality and length of stay of trauma-related complications: a matched cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the attributable mortality (AM) and excess length of stay because of complications or complication groupings in the National Trauma Data Bank. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Resources devoted to performance improvement activities should focus on complications that significantly impact mortality and length of stay. To determine which post-traumatic complications impact these outcomes, we conducted a matched cohort study. AM is the proportion of all deaths that can be prevented if the complication did not occur. METHODS: We identified severely injured patients (Injury Severity Score, > or =9) at centers that contribute complications to the National Trauma Data Bank. To estimate the AM, a patient with a specific complication was matched to 5 patients without the complication. Matching was based on demographics and injury characteristics. Residual confounding was addressed through a logistic regression model. To estimate excess length of stay, matching covariates were identified through a Poisson regression model. Each case was required to match the control on all variables, and one control was selected per case. RESULTS: Of the 94,795 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 3153 died. The overall mortality rate was 3.33%, and 10,478 (11.1%) patients developed at least 1 complication. Four complication groupings (cardiovascular, acute respiratory distress syndrome, renal failure, and sepsis) were associated with significant AM. Infectious complications (surgical infections, sepsis, and pneumonia) were associated with the greatest excess length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: This study used AM and excess length of stay to identify trauma-related complications for external benchmarking. Guideline development and performance improvement activities need to be focused on these complications to significantly reduce the probability of poor outcomes following injury.

Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) coefficients 2009 revision.

BACKGROUND: Currently used Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) coefficients, which measure probability of survival (PS), were derived from the Major Trauma Outcome Study (MTOS) in 1995 and are now unlikely to be optimal. This study aims to estimate new TRISS coefficients using a contemporary database of injured patients presenting to emergency departments in the United States; and to compare these against the MTOS coefficients. METHODS: Data were obtained from the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) and the NTDB National Sample Project (NSP). TRISS coefficients were estimated using logistic regression. Separate coefficients were derived from complete case and multistage multiple imputation analyses for each NTDB and NSP dataset. Associated PS over Injury Severity Score values were graphed and compared by age (adult >or=15 years; pediatric <15 years) and injury mechanism (blunt; penetrating) groups. Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curves was used to assess coefficients' predictive performance. RESULTS: Overall 1,072,033 NTDB and 1,278,563 weighted NSP injury events were included, compared with 23,177 used in the original MTOS analyses. Large differences were seen between results from complete case and imputed analyses. For blunt mechanism and adult penetrating mechanism injuries, there were similarities between coefficients estimated on imputed samples, and marked divergences between associated PS estimates and those from the MTOS. However, negligible differences existed between area under the receiver operating characteristic curves estimates because the overwhelming majority of patients had minor trauma and survived. For pediatric penetrating mechanism injuries, variability in coefficients was large and PS estimates unreliable. CONCLUSIONS: Imputed NTDB coefficients are recommended as the TRISS coefficients 2009 revision for blunt mechanism and adult penetrating mechanism injuries. Coefficients for pediatric penetrating mechanism injuries could not be reliably estimated.

The Trauma Quality Improvement Program: pilot study and initial demonstration of feasibility.

OBJECTIVE: The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma has created a "Trauma Quality Improvement Program" (TQIP) that uses the existing infrastructure of Committee on Trauma programs. As the first step toward full implementation of TQIP, a pilot study was conducted in 23 American College of Surgeons verified or state designated Level I and II trauma centers. This study details the feasibility and acceptance of TQIP among the participating centers. METHODS: Data from the National Trauma Data Bank for patients admitted to pilot study hospitals during 2007 were used (15,801 patients). A multivariable logistic regression model was developed to estimate risk-adjusted mortality in aggregate and on three prespecified subgroups (1: blunt multisystem, 2: penetrating truncal, and 3: blunt single-system injury). Benchmark reports were developed with each center's risk adjusted mortality (expressed as an observed-to-expected [O/E] mortality ratio and 90% confidence interval [CI]) and crude complication rates available for comparison. Reports were deidentified with only the recipient having access to their performance relative to their peers. Feedback from individual centers regarding the utility of the reports was collected by survey. RESULTS: Overall crude mortality was 7.7% and in cohorts 1 to 3 was 16.4%, 12.4%, and 5.1%, respectively. In the aggregate risk-adjusted analysis, three trauma centers were low outliers (O/E and 90% CI <1) and two centers were high outliers (O/E and 90% CI >1) with the remaining 18 centers demonstrating average mortality. Challenges identified were in benchmarking mortality after penetrating injury due to small sample size and in the limited capture of complications. Ninety-two percent of survey respondents found the report clear and understandable, and 90% thought that the report was useful. Sixty-three percent of respondents will be taking action based on the report. CONCLUSIONS: Using the National Trauma Data Bank infrastructure to provide risk-adjusted benchmarking of trauma center mortality is feasible and perceived as useful. There are differences in O/E ratios across similarly verified or designated centers. Substantial work is required to allow for morbidity benchmarking.