Complications following thoracic trauma managed with tube thoracostomy.

INTRODUCTION: Tube thoracostomy is a common procedure used to treat traumatic chest injuries. Although the mechanism of injury traditionally does not alter chest tube management, complication rates may vary depending on the severity of injury. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of and risk factors associated with chest tube complications (CTCs) following thoracic trauma. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all trauma patients (≥16 years old) admitted to an urban level 1 trauma centre (1/2007-12/2007) was conducted. Patients who required chest tube (CT) therapy for thoracic injuries within 24 h of admission and survived until CT removal were included. CTCs were defined as a recurrent pneumothorax or residual haemothorax requiring CT reinsertion within 24 h after initial tube removal or addition of new CT >24 h after initial placement. Variables including demographic data, mechanism, associated injuries, initial vital signs, chest abbreviated injury score (AIS), injury severity score (ISS), Glasgow coma score (GCS) and length of stay (LOS) and CT-specific variables (e.g. indication, timing of insertion, and duration of therapy) were compared using the chi square test, Mann-Whitney test, and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: 154 patients were included with 22.1% (n=34) developing a CTC. On univariate analysis, CTCs were associated with longer ICU and hospital LOS (p=0.02 and p<0.001), increased chest AIS (p=0.01), and the presence of an extrathoracic injury (p=0.047). Results of the multivariate analysis indicated that only increased chest AIS (OR 2.49; p=0.03) was a significantly independent predictor of CTCs. CONCLUSIONS: CTCs following chest trauma are common and are associated with increased morbidity. The severity of the thoracic injury, as measured by chest AIS, should be incorporated into the development of CT management guidelines in order to decrease the incidence of CTCs.

Does the trauma system protect against the weekend effect?

BACKGROUND: Occurrence on weekends or at night has been associated with poor outcomes for time-sensitive conditions including ST elevation myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiac arrest. We sought to determine whether the "weekend effect" exists for injured patients at our trauma center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study at a Level I trauma center (2006-2008). The relative risks of mortality associated with weekend or night arrival were estimated using unadjusted and adjusted analyses. RESULTS: Four thousand three hundred eighty-two patients were included. One-third of patients (34.0%) arrived on weekends, and 23.3% of patients arrived at night (12:00 midnight to 6:00 am). Average age was 43.2 years (44.2 weekdays vs. 41.4 weekends, p < 0.001 and 45.1 days vs. 37.5 nights, p < 0.001), 72.3% were men (72.6 weekdays vs. 71.8 weekends, p = not significant (NS) and 71.0% days vs. 76.8% nights, p < 0.001), overall Injury Severity Score was 13.7 (13.7 weekdays vs. 13.6 weekends, p = NS and 13.7 days vs. 13.3 nights, p = NS), and overall Glasgow Coma Scale score was 13.6 (13.5 weekdays vs. 13.6 weekends, p = NS and 13.7 days vs. 13.4 nights, p < 0.05). In unadjusted analyses, no survival difference was detected for patients presenting on weekends (5.2% vs. 5.3%; odds ratio [OR], 0.98; and 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.28) or at night (4.4% vs. 5.5%; OR, 0.81; and 95% CI, 0.58-1.11). In adjusted analyses controlling for age, sex, Injury Severity Score, Glasgow Coma Scale score, and arrival hypotension, no survival difference was detected on weekends (OR, 1.03 and 95% CI, 0.71-1.51) or at night (OR, 0.79 and 95% CI, 0.49-1.25). CONCLUSION: Differential mortality on off-hours is not seen at our Level I trauma center. Outcomes that are independent of time of day and day of week may be because of the explicit requirements for trauma centers to be fully staffed and operational at all times. There are implications for staffing and systems solutions for other time-sensitive disease including ST elevation myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiac arrest. Interventions may include the development of a categorization system based on emergency care capabilities, development of explicit staffing requirements, and requiring an emergency care-specific quality improvement program.