So You Want to Do Trauma Research? A Practical Guide to Creating a Research Program at Your Home Institution.

BACKGROUND: There are 3 pillars upon which the foundation of a teaching program in health care is founded: research, education, and clinical care. However, in a busy academic trauma practice, the unfortunate reality is that research is often a low priority in the frenzy of mandates for clinical productivity. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this report is to advise hospitals on how to create a modest trauma research program that supports research interests without significantly impacting the overall clinical productivity of the department. METHODS: Relevant literature related to the development of an academic trauma research department was reviewed. Relevant articles were then compared to this manuscript to assess the novelty of the topic. RESULTS: There are 4 essential components of a trauma research program: (1) a zealot, (2) institutional commitment and support, (3) a statistician, and (4) registry data access. CONCLUSION: The creation of a trauma research program may seem like a herculean effort, but this work is necessary for institutions hoping to achieve status as a Level I/II trauma center. Following the steps outlined in this report, trauma providers can create a robust research program at their institution without sacrificing clinical productivity.

Brain death/death by neurologic criteria: What you need to know.

ABSTRACT: Since the beginning of time, man has been intrigued with the question of when a person is considered dead. Traditionally, death has been considered the cessation of all cardiorespiratory function. At the end of the last century a new definition was introduced into the lexicon surrounding death in addition to cessation of cardiac and respiratory function: Brain Death/Death by Neurologic Criteria (BD/DNC). There are medical, legal, ethical, and even theological controversies that surround this diagnosis. In addition, there is no small amount of confusion among medical practitioners regarding the diagnosis of BD/DNC. For families enduring the devastating development of BD/DNC in their loved one, it is the duty of the principal caregiver to provide a transparent presentation of the clinical situation and clear definitive explanation of what constitutes BD/DNC. In this report, we present a historical outline of the development of BD/DNC as a clinical entity, specifically how one goes about making a determination of BD/DNC, what steps are taken once a diagnosis of BD/DNC is made, a brief discussion of some of the ethical/moral issues surrounding this diagnosis, and finally the caregiver approach to the family of a patient who had been declared with BD/DNC. It is our humble hope that with a greater understanding of the myriad of complicated issues surrounding the diagnosis of BD/DNC that the bedside caregiver can provide needed closure for both the patient and the family enduring this critical time in their life.

The State of the Union: Trauma System Development in the United States.

Injury is both a national and international epidemic that affects people of all age, race, religion, and socioeconomic class. Injury was the fourth leading cause of death in the United States (U.S.) in 2021 and results in an incalculable emotional and financial burden on our society. Despite this, when prevention fails, trauma centers allow communities to prepare to care for the traumatically injured patient. Using lessons learned from the military, trauma care has grown more sophisticated in the last 50 years. In 1966, the first civilian trauma center was established, bringing management of injury into the new age. Now, the American College of Surgeons recognizes 4 levels of trauma centers (I-IV), with select states recognizing Level V trauma centers. The introduction of trauma centers in the U.S. has been proven to reduce morbidity and mortality for the injured patient. However, despite the proven benefits of trauma centers, the U.S. lacks a single, unified, trauma system and instead operates within a "system of systems" creating vast disparities in the level of care that can be received, especially in rural and economically disadvantaged areas. In this review we present the history of trauma system development in the U.S, define the different levels of trauma centers, present evidence that trauma systems and trauma centers improve outcomes, outline the current state of trauma system development in the U.S, and briefly mention some of the current challenges and opportunities in trauma system development in the U.S. today.

American Trauma Care: A System of Systems.

OBJECTIVE: The benefits of organized trauma systems have been well-documented during 50 years of trauma system development in the United States. Unfortunately, despite this evidence, trauma system development has occurred only sporadically in the 50 states. METHODS: The relevant literature related to trauma system design and development was reviewed based on relevance to the study. Information from these sources was summarized into a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. RESULTS: Strengths discovered were leadership brought forth by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma and meaningful change generated from The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report addressing the fractionation of the nation's trauma systems, whereas weaknesses included patient outcome disparities due to the lack of a national governing authority, undertriage, underresourced rural trauma, and underfunded trauma research. Opportunities included the creation of level IV trauma centers; telemedicine; the development of rural trauma management courses; air medical transport to bring high-intensity care to the patient, particularly in rural areas; trauma research; and trauma prevention through outreach and educational programs. The following threats were determined: mass casualty incidents, motor vehicle collisions because of the high rate of motor vehicle collision deaths in the United States relative to other developed countries, and underfunded trauma systems. CONCLUSION: Much work remains to be done in the development of an American trauma system. Recommendations include implementation of trauma care governance at the federal level; national oversight and support of emergency medical services systems, particularly in rural areas with strict reporting processes for emergency medical services programs; national organization of our mass casualty response; increased federal and state funding allocated to trauma centers; a consistent model for trauma system development; and trauma research.

Comprehensive Review of Current Pain Management in Rib Fractures With Practical Guidelines for Clinicians.

Rib fractures are present in 15% of all traumas and 60% of patients with chest traumas. Rib fractures are not life-threatening in isolation, but they can be quite painful which leads to splinting and compromise of respiratory function. Splinting limits the ability of a patient to take a deep breath, which leads to atelectasis, atelectasis to poor secretion removal, and poor secretion removal leads to pneumonia. Pneumonia is the common pathway to respiratory failure in patients with rib fractures. It is noted that in the elderly, each rib fracture increases developing pneumonia by 27% and the risk of dying by 19%. From a public health perspective, rib fractures have long-term implications with only 59% of patients returning to work at 6 months. In this review we will examine the state of art as it currently exists with regard to the management of pain associated with rib fractures. Included in this overview will be a brief review of the anatomy of the thorax and some important physiologic concepts, the latest trends in pharmacologic and noninvasive means of managing rib pain, a special section on epidural anesthesia, some other alternative invasive methods of pain control, and a review of the recent literature on rib plating. Finally, a practical, easy to follow guideline, to manage the patient with pain from rib fractures will be presented.

Long-term outcomes after using retrievable vena cava filters in major trauma patients with contraindications to prophylactic anticoagulation.

PURPOSE: To investigate the long-term outcomes of using vena cava filters to prevent symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) in major trauma patients who have contraindications to prophylactic anticoagulation. METHODS: This was an a priori sub-study of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) involving long-term outcome data of 223 patients who were enrolled in Western Australia. State-wide clinical information system, radiology database and death registry were used to assess long-term outcomes, including incidences of venous thromboembolism, venous injury and mortality beyond day-90 follow-up. RESULTS: The median follow-up time of 198 patients (89%) who survived beyond 90 days was 65 months (interquartile range 59-73). Ten patients (5.1%) died after day-90 follow-up; and four patients developed venous thromboembolism, including two with symptomatic PE, all allocated to the control group (0 vs 4%, p = 0.043). Inferior vena cava injuries were not recorded in any patients. The mean total hospitalization cost, including the costs of the filter and its insertion and removal, to prevent one short- or long-term symptomatic PE was A$284,820 (€193,678) when all enrolled patients were considered. The number of patients needed to treat (NNT = 5) and total hospitalization cost to prevent one symptomatic PE (A$1,205 or €820) were, however, substantially lower when the filter was used only for patients who could not be anticoagulated within seven days of injury. CONCLUSION: Long-term complications related to retrievable filters were rare, and the cost of using filters to prevent symptomatic PE was acceptable when restricted to those who could not be anticoagulated within seven days of severe injury.

A Novel Approach to Assessment of US Pediatric Trauma System Development.

Importance: Mature trauma systems are critical in building and maintaining national, state, and local resilience against all-hazard disasters. Currently, pediatric state trauma system plans are not standardized and thus are without concrete measures of potential effectiveness. Objective: To develop objective measures of pediatric trauma system capability at the state level, hypothesizing significant variation in capabilities between states, and to provide a contemporary report on the status of national pediatric trauma system planning and development. Design, Setting, and Participants: A national survey was deployed in 2018 to perform a gap analysis of state pediatric trauma system capabilities. Four officials from each state were asked to complete the survey regarding extensive pediatric-related or specific trauma system parameters. Using these parameters, a panel of 14 individuals representing national stakeholder sectors in pediatric trauma care convened to identify the essential components of the ideal pediatric trauma system using Delphi methodology. Data analysis was conducted from March 16, 2019, to February 23, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Based on results from the national survey and consensus panel parameters, each state was given a composite score. The score was validated using US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER) fatal injury database. Results: The national survey had less than 10% missing data. The consensus panel reached agreement on 6 major domains of pediatric trauma systems (disaster, legislation/funding, access to care, injury prevention/recognition, quality improvement, pediatric readiness) and was used to develop the Pediatric Trauma System Assessment Score (PTSAS) based on 100 points. There was substantial variation across states, with state scores ranging from 48.5 to 100. Based on US CDC WONDER data, for every 1-point increase in PTSAS, there was a 0.12 per 100 000 decrease in mortality (95% CI, -0.22 to -0.02; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cross-sectional study suggest that a more robust pediatric trauma system has a significant association with pediatric injury mortality. This study assessed the national landscape of capability and preparedness to provide pediatric trauma care at the state level. These parameters can tailor the maturation of children's interests within a state trauma system and assist with future state, regional, and national planning.

A prospective ex vivo biomechanical analysis of retrievable inferior vena cava filters.

OBJECTIVE: In the present study, we investigated the structural integrity of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters after their retrieval. METHODS: A prospective ex vivo biomechanical analysis was performed of the structural integrity of 100 IVC filters used in a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic IVC filters in preventing mortality or symptomatic pulmonary embolism in major trauma patients. RESULTS: Of the 100 included patients, 7 (7%) had required more than one attempt to remove the filter. The median duration of the filter left in situ was 54 days (interquartile range, 17-101 days). During the initial attempt to remove six filters (6%), thrombi were found entrapped and required 4 weeks of systemic anticoagulation therapy before the filters could be removed in a second attempt. A positive correlation was found between the duration of the filter left in situ and the loss in metallic elasticity of the nitinol alloy of the filter struts (Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.232; P = .008). One filter was adherent to the IVC wall and required open surgical removal 227 days after its initial placement. One of the six long struts of the filter had been fractured during the removal process, with evidence of hardening to bending stress in the remaining five struts of the fractured filter compared with the struts of the 25 intact filters. Fibrous endothelial tissue (73%) and thrombi (33%) adherent to the retrieved filters were frequently observed. The presence of adherent fibrous tissue was not significantly related statistically to the duration of the filter left in situ (P = .353) but was more common among the patients who had had a delay in receiving prophylactic anticoagulation therapy (mean difference, 2 days; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-3.3; P = .039). CONCLUSIONS: Metallic fatigue might account for IVC filter strut fractures. Fibrous endothelial tissue adherent to the filters was common, especially for those with a delay in receiving prophylactic anticoagulation therapy.

Incremental cost of venous thromboembolism in trauma patients with contraindications to prophylactic anticoagulation: a prospective economic study.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in patients after major trauma. Attributable cost of VTE and whether this is related to the severity of injury have not been thoroughly investigated. We aimed to define the hospitalization costs of VTE and assess whether the costs were related to the severity of injury in this prospective economic study. Cost data of each patient enrolled in the da Vinci trial were drawn from hospital finance departments and standardized to 2020 Australian dollars (A$); and Injury Severity Score and Trauma Embolic Scoring System were used to quantify the severity of injury. Of the 223 patients who had complete financial cost data available until day-90 follow-up, 37 (16.6%) developed VTE, including upper limb (n = 3) and lower limb deep vein thrombosis (n = 25), pulmonary embolism (n = 7) and clots entrapped in a vena cava filter. The median total radiology (A$4307) as well as the hospitalization costs (A$138,526) of those who had VTE were significantly higher than those without VTE (A$1210; p < 0.001 and A$105,842; p = 0.023, respectively). The incremental hospitalization cost attributable to VTE was most apparent among those who had sustained extremely severe injuries, and estimated to be between A$43,292 (95% confidence interval [CI] 12,624-73,961, p = 0.006) and 41,680 (95%CI 7766-75,594, p = 0.016) after adjusted for Trauma Embolic Scoring System and Injury Severity Scores, respectively. VTE was common after major trauma and incurred a substantial incremental financial cost to the healthcare system, especially among those who had extremely severe injuries.

Radiographic Reread Protocols to Identify Clinically Relevant Errors in Initial Trauma Evaluations.

INTRODUCTION: Diagnostic radiology interpretive errors in trauma patients can lead to missed diagnoses, compromising patient care. Due to this, our level II trauma center implemented a reread protocol of all radiographic imaging within 24 hours on our highest trauma activation level (Code T). We sought to determine the efficacy of this reread protocol in identifying missed diagnoses in Code T patients. We hypothesized that a few, but clinically relevant errors, would be identified upon reread. METHODS: All radiographic study findings (initial read and reread) performed for Code T admissions from July 2015 to May 2016 were queried. The reviewed radiological imaging was given one of four designations: agree with interpretation, minor (non-life threatening) nonclinically relevant error(s)-addendum/correction required or clinically relevant error(s) (major [life threatening] and minor)-addendum/correction required, and trauma surgeon notified. The results were compiled, and the number of each type of error was calculated. RESULTS: Of the 752 radiological imaging studies reviewed on the 121 Code T patients during this period, 3 (0.40%) contained minor clinically relevant errors, 11 (1.46%) contained errors that were not clinically relevant, and 738 (98.1%) agreed with the original interpretation. The three clinically relevant errors included a right mandibular fracture found on X-ray and a temporal bone fracture that crossed the clivus and bilateral rib fractures found on computerized tomography. DISCUSSION: Clinically relevant errors, although minimal, were discovered during rereads for Code T patients. Although the clinical errors were significant, none affected patient outcomes. We propose that the implementation of reread protocols should be based upon institution-specific practices.

Cost-effectiveness of early placement of vena cava filters to prevent symptomatic pulmonary embolism in patients with contraindications to prophylactic anticoagulant.

INTRODUCTION: Vena cava filters have been used as a primary means to prevent symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) in trauma patients who cannot be anticoagulated after severe injury, but the economic implications for this practice remain unclear. METHODS: Using a healthcare system perspective to analyze the a priori primary outcome of the da Vinci trial, we report the cost-effectiveness of using vena cava filters as a primary means to prevent PE in patients who have contraindications to prophylactic anticoagulation after major trauma. RESULTS: Of the 240 patients enrolled, complete, prospectively collected, hospital cost data during the entire hospital stay - including costs for the filter, medical/nursing/allied health staff, medical supplies, pathology tests, and radiological imaging - were available in 223 patients (93%). Patients allocated to the filter group (n = 114) were associated with a reduced risk of PE (0.9%) compared to those in the control group (n = 109, 5.5%; p = 0.048); and the filter's benefit was more pronounced among those who could not be anticoagulated within 7 days (filter: 0% vs control: 16%, Bonferroni-corrected p = 0.02). Overall, the cost needed to prevent one PE was high (AUD $379,760), but among those who could not be anticoagulated within 7 days, the costs to prevent one PE (AUD $36,156; ~ USD $26,032) and gain one quality-adjusted life-year (AUD $30,903; ~ USD $22,250) were substantially lower. CONCLUSION: The cost of using a vena cava filter to prevent PE for those who have contraindications to prophylactic anticoagulation within 3 days of injury is prohibitive, unless such contraindications remain for longer than 7 days. (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry no.: ACTRN12614000963628).

An Evaluation of Pediatric Secondary Overtriage in the Pennsylvania Trauma System.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the secondary overtriage rate of pediatric trauma patients admitted to pediatric trauma centers. We hypothesized that pediatric secondary overtriage (POT) would constitute a large percentage of admissions to PTC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study database was retrospectively queried from 2003 to 2017 for pediatric (age ≤ 18 y) trauma patients transferred to accredited pediatric trauma centers in Pennsylvania (n = 6). Patients were stratified based on discharge within (early) and beyond (late) 24 h following admission. POT was defined as patients transferred to a PTC with an early discharge. Multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression model controlling for demographic and injury severity covariates were utilized to determine the adjusted impact of injury patterns on early discharge. RESULTS: A total of 37,653 patients met inclusion criteria. For transfers, POT compromised 18,752 (49.8%) patients. Compared to POT, non-POT were more severely injured (ISS: 10 versus 6;P < 0.001) and spent less time in the ED (Min: 181 versus 207;P < 0.001). In adjusted analysis, concussion, closed skull vault fractures, supracondylar humerus fractures, and consults to neurosurgery were associated with increased odds of POT. Overall, femur fracture, child abuse evaluation, and consults to plastic surgery, orthopedics, and ophthalmology were all associated with a decreased risk of being POT. CONCLUSIONS: POT comprises 49.8% of PTC transfer admissions in Pennsylvania's trauma system. Improving community resources for management of pediatric concussion and mild TBI could result in decreased rates of POT to PTCs. Developing better inter-facility transfer guidelines and increased education of adult TC and nontrauma center hospitals is needed to decrease POT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic study, level III.

A comprehensive analysis of undertriage in a mature trauma system using geospatial mapping.

INTRODUCTION: The correct triage of trauma patients to trauma centers (TCs) is essential. We sought to determine the percentage of patients who were undertriaged within the Pennsylvania (PA) trauma system and spatially analyze areas of undertriage (UTR) in PA for all age groups: pediatric, adult, and geriatric. We hypothesized that there would be certain areas that had high UTR for all age groups. METHODS: From 2003 to 2015, all admissions from the Pennsylvania Trauma Systems Foundation registry and those meeting trauma criteria (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Diseases: 800-959) from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council (PHC4) database were included. Admissions were divided into age groups: pediatric (<15 years), adult (15-64 years), and geriatric (≥65 years). All pediatric trauma cases were included from the Pennsylvania Trauma Systems Foundation and PHC4 registry, while only cases with Injury Severity Score of >9 were included in adult and geriatric age groups. Undertriage was defined as patients not admitted to level I/II adult TCs (n = 24), pediatric (n = 3), or adult and pediatric combined facility (n = 3) divided by the total number of patients from the PHC4 database. ArcGIS Desktop (version 10.7; ESRI, Redlands, CA) and GeoDa (version 1.14.0; CSDS, Chicago, IL) open source license were used for geospatial mapping of UTR with a spatial empirical Bayesian smoothed UTR by zip code tabulation area (ZCTA) and Stata (version 16.1; Stata Corp., College Station, TX) for statistical analyses. RESULTS: There were significant percentages of UTR for all age groups. One area of high UTR for all age groups had TCs and large nontrauma centers in close proximity. There were high rates of UTR for all ages in rural areas, specifically in the upper central regions of PA, with limited access to TCs. CONCLUSION: It appears there are two patterns leading to UTR. The first is in areas where TCs are in close proximity to large competing nontrauma centers, which may lead to inappropriate triage. The second has to do with lack of access to TCs. Geospatial mapping is a valuable tool that can be used to ascertain where trauma systems should focus scarce resources to decrease UTR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological, level III; Care management, level III.

Geriatric Trauma Mortality: Does Trauma Center Level Matter?

BACKGROUND: Given their mostly rural/suburban locations, level II trauma centers (TCs) may offer greater exposure to and experience in managing geriatric trauma patients. We hypothesized that geriatric patients would have improved outcomes at level II TCs compared to level I TCs. METHODS: The Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study (PTOS) database was retrospectively queried from 2003 to 2017 for geriatric (age ≥65 years) trauma patients admitted to level I and II TCs in Pennsylvania. Patient demographics, injury severity, and clinical outcomes were compared to assess differences in care between level I and II TCs. A multivariate logistic regression model assessed the adjusted impact of care at level I vs II TCs on mortality, complications, and functional status at discharge (FSD). The National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) was retrospectively queried for geriatric (age ≥65 years) trauma admissions to state-accredited level I or level II TCs in 2013. RESULTS: 112 648 patients met inclusion criteria. The proportion of geriatric trauma patients across level I and level II TCs were determined to be 29.1% and 36.2% (P <.001), respectively. In adjusted analysis, there was no difference in mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 1.13; P = .375), complications (AOR: 1.25; P = .080) or FSD (AOR: 1.09; P = .493) when comparing level I to level II TCs. Adjusted analysis from the NTDB (n = 144 622) also found that mortality was not associated with TC level (AOR: 1.04; P = .182). DISCUSSION: Level I and level II TCs had similar rates of mortality, complications, and functional outcomes despite a higher proportion (but lower absolute number) of geriatric patients being admitted to level II TCs. Future consideration for location of centers of excellence in geriatric trauma should include both level I and II TCs.

Massive Transfusion Protocol and Subsequent Development of Venous Thromboembolism: Statewide Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Massive transfusion protocols (MTP) are a routine component of any major trauma center's armamentarium in the management of exsanguinating hemorrhages. Little is known about the potential complications of those that survive a MTP. We sought to determine the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) following MTP. We hypothesized that MTP would be associated with a higher risk of VTE when compared with a risk-adjusted control population without MTP. METHODS: The Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study database was retrospectively queried from 2015 to 2018 for trauma patients who developed VTE and survived until discharge at accredited trauma centers in Pennsylvania. Patient demographics, injury severity, and clinical outcomes were compared to assess differences in VTE development between MTP and non-MTP patients. A multivariate logistic regression model assessed the adjusted impact of MTP on VTE development. RESULTS: 176 010 patients survived until discharge, meeting inclusion criteria. Of those, 1667 developed a VTE (pulmonary embolism [PE]: 662 [0.4%]; deep vein thrombosis [DVT]: 1142 [0.6%]; PE and DVT: 137 [0.1%]). 1268 patients (0.7%) received MTP and, of this subset of patients, 171 (13.5%) developed a VTE during admission. In adjusted analysis, patients who had a MTP and survived until discharge had a higher odds of developing a VTE (adjusted odds ratio: 2.62; 95% CI: 2.13-3.24; P < .001). DISCUSSION: MTP is a harbinger for higher risk of VTE in those patients who survive. This may, in part, be related to the overcorrection of coagulation deficits encountered in the hemorrhagic event. A high index of suspicion for the development of VTE as well as aggressive VTE prophylaxis is warranted in those patients who survive MTP.

Predictors of Trauma High Resource Consumers in a Mature Trauma System.

BACKGROUND: Extended hospital length of stay (LOS) is widely associated with significant healthcare costs. Since LOS is a known surrogate for cost, we sought to evaluate outliers. We hypothesized that particular characteristics are likely predictive of trauma high resource consumers (THRC) and can be used to more effectively manage care of this population. METHODS: The Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study database was retrospectively queried from 2003-2017 for all adult (age ≥15) trauma patients admitted to accredited trauma centers in Pennsylvania. THRC were defined as patients with hospital LOS two standard deviations above the population mean or ≥22 days (p<0.05). Patient demographics, comorbid conditions and clinical variables were compared between THRC and non-THRC to identify potential predictor variables. A multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression model controlling for age, gender, injury severity, admission Glasgow coma score, systolic blood pressure, and injury year assessed the adjusted impact of clinical factors in predicting THRC status. The National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) was retrospectively queried from 2014-2016 for all adult (age ≥15) trauma patients admitted to state-accredited trauma centers and likewise were assessed for factors associated with THRC. RESULTS: A total of 465,601 patients met inclusion criteria [THRC: 16,818 (3.6%); non-THRC 448,783 (96.4%)]. Compared to non-THRC counterparts, THRC patients were significantly more severely injured (median ISS: 9 vs. 22, p<0.001). In adjusted analysis, gunshot wound (GSW) to the abdomen, undergoing major surgery and reintubation along with injury to the spine, upper or lower extremities were significantly associated with THRC. From the NTDB, 2 323 945 patients met inclusion criteria. In adjusted analysis, GSW to the abdomen was significantly associated with THRC. Penetrating injury overall was associated with decreased risk of being a THRC in the NTDB dataset. Those who had either GSW to abdomen, surgery, or reintubation required significantly longer LOS (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Reintubation, major surgery, gunshot wound to abdomen, along with injury to the spine, upper or lower extremities are all strongly predictive of THRC. Understanding the profile of the THRC will allow clinicians and case management to proactively put processes in place to streamline care and potentially reduce costs and LOS.