Pain management in trauma patients in (pre)hospital based emergency care: current practice versus new guideline.

INTRODUCTION: Acute pain in trauma patients in emergency care is still undertreated. Early pain treatment is assumed to effectively reduce pain in patients and improve long-term outcomes. In order to improve pain management in the chain of emergency care, a national evidence-based guideline was developed. The aim of this study was to assess whether current practice is in compliance with the guideline 'Pain management for trauma patients in the chain of emergency care' from the Netherlands Association for Emergency Nurses (in Dutch NVSHV), and to evaluate early and initial pain management for adult trauma patients in emergency care. METHODS: Chart reviews were conducted in three regions of the Netherlands using electronic patient files of trauma patients from the chain of emergency care. We included one after-hours General Practitioner Co-operation (GPC), one ambulance Emergency Medical Services (EMS), two Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS), and three Emergency Departments (EDs). Organisation of pain management, pain assessment, and pain treatment was examined and compared with national guideline recommendations, including quality indicators. RESULTS: We assessed a random sample of 1066 electronic patient files. The use of standardised tools to assess pain was registered in zero to 52% of the electronic patient files per organisation. Registration of (non-)pharmacological pain treatment was found in less than half of the files. According to the files, pharmacological pain treatment deviated from the guideline in 73-99% of the files. Time of administration of medication was missing in 73-100%. Reassessment of pain following pain medication was recorded in half of the files by the HEMS, but not in files of the other organisations. CONCLUSIONS: The (registration of) current pain management in trauma patients in the chain of emergency care varies widely between healthcare organisation, and deviates from national guideline recommendations. Although guideline compliance differs across groups of healthcare professionals, maximum compliance rate with indicators registered is 52%. In order to improve pain management and evaluate its effectiveness, we recommend to improve pain registration in patient files. Furthermore, we advise to identify barriers and facilitators related to the implementation of the national guideline in all emergency care organisations.

Health-related quality of life after mild, moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: patterns and predictors of suboptimal functioning during the first year after injury.

BACKGROUND: The Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) is the established functional outcome scale to assess disability following traumatic brain injury (TBI), however does not capture the patient's subjective perspective. Health-related quality of life (HRQL) does capture the individual's perception of disability after TBI, and has therefore been recognized as an important outcome in TBI. In contrast to GOSE, HRQL enables comparison of health outcome across various disease states and with healthy individuals. We aimed to assess functional outcome, HRQL, recovery, and predictors of 6 and 12-month outcome in a comprehensive sample of patients with mild, moderate or severe TBI, and to examine the relationship between functional impairment (GOSE) and HRQL. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted among a sample of 2066 adult TBI patients who attended the emergency department (ED). GOSE was determined through questionnaires or structured interviews. Questionnaires 6 and 12 months after ED treatment included socio-demographic information and HRQL measured with Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36; reflecting physical, mental and social functioning) and Perceived Quality of Life Scale (PQoL; measuring degree of satisfaction with functioning). RESULTS: 996 TBI survivors with mild, moderate or severe TBI completed the 6-month questionnaire. Functional outcome and HRQL after moderate or severe TBI was significantly lower than after mild TBI. Patients with moderate TBI showed greatest improvement. After one year, the mild TBI group reached outcomes comparable to population norms. TBI of all severities highly affected SF-36 domains physical and social functioning, and physical and emotional role functioning. GOSE scores were highly related to all SF-36 domains and PQoL scores. Female gender, older age, co-morbidity and high ISS were strongest independent predictors of decreased HRQL at 6 and 12 months after TBI. CONCLUSIONS: HRQL and recovery patterns differ for mild, moderate and severe TBI. This study indicates that GOSE, although clinically relevant, fails to capture the subjective perspective of TBI patients, which endorses the use of HRQL as valuable addition to established instruments in assessing disability following TBI. Influence of TBI severity on recovery, together with female gender, older age, co-morbidity and high ISS should be considered in long-term follow-up and intervention programs.