Access to Immediately Available Balanced Blood Products in a Rural State's Trauma System.

INTRODUCTION: The Arkansas Trauma System was established by law more than a dozen years ago, and all participating trauma centers are required to maintain red blood cells. Since then, there has been a paradigm shift in resuscitating exsanguinating trauma patients. Damage Control Resuscitation with balanced blood products (or whole blood) and minimal crystalloid is now the standard of care. This project aimed to determine access to balanced blood products in our state's Trauma System (TS). METHODS: A survey of all trauma centers in the Arkansas TS was conducted, and geospatial analysis was performed. Immediately Available Balanced Blood (IABB) was defined as at least 2 units (U) of thawed plasma (TP) or never frozen plasma (NFP), 4 units of red blood cells (RBCs), 2 units of fresh frozen plasma (FFP), and 1 unit of platelets or 2 units of whole blood (WB). RESULTS: All 64 trauma centers in the state TS completed the survey. All level I, II, and III Trauma Centers (TCs) maintain RBC, plasma, and platelets, but only half of the level II and 16% of the level III TCs have thawed or never frozen plasma. A third of level IV TCs maintain only RBCs, while only 1 had platelets, and none had thawed plasma. 85% of people in our state are within 30 min of RBCs, almost two-thirds are within 30 min of plasma (TP, NFP, or FFP) and platelets, while only a third are within 30 min of IABB. More than 90% are within an hour of plasma and platelets, while only 60% are within that time from an IABB. The median drive times for Arkansas from RBC, plasma (TP, NFP, or FFP), platelets, and an immediately available and balanced blood bank are 19, 21, 32, and 59 minutes, respectively. A lack of thawed or non-frozen plasma and platelets are the most common limitations of IABB. One level III TC in the state maintains WB, which would alleviate the limited access to IABB. CONCLUSION: Only 16% of the trauma centers in Arkansas can provide IABB, and only 61% of the population can reach IABB within 60 minutes. Opportunities exist to reduce the time to balanced blood products by selectively distributing WB, TP, or NFP to hospitals in our state trauma system.

Advanced prehospital resuscitative care: Can we identify trauma patients who might benefit?

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled truncal hemorrhage remains the most common cause of potentially preventable death after injury. The notion of earlier hemorrhage control and blood product resuscitation is therefore attractive. Some systems have successfully implemented prehospital advanced resuscitative care (ARC) teams. Early identification of patients is key and is reliant on rapid decision making and communication. The purpose of this simulation study was to explore the feasibility of early identification of patients who might benefit from ARC in a typical US setting. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational/simulation study at a level I trauma center and two associated emergency medical service (EMS) agencies over a 9-month period. The participating EMS agencies were asked to identify actual patients who might benefit from the activation of a hypothetical trauma center-based ARC team. This decision was then communicated in real time to the study team. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were determined to require activation. The number of activations per month ranged from 2 to 15. The highest incidence of calls occurred between 4 pm to midnight. Of the 63 patients, 33 were transported to the trauma center. The most common presentation was with penetrating trauma. The median age was 27 years (interquartile range, 24-45 years), 75% were male, and the median Injury Severity Score was 11 (interquartile range, 7-20). Based on injury patterns, treatment received, and outcomes, it was determined that 6 (18%) of 33 patients might have benefited from ARC. Three of the patients died en-route to or soon after arrival at the trauma center. CONCLUSION: The prehospital identification of patients who might benefit from ARC is possible but faces challenges. Identifying strategies to adapt existing processes may allow better utilization of the existing infrastructure and should be a focus of future efforts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/Epidemiologic, level III.

Impact of Rural Hospital Closures on Health-Care Access.

BACKGROUND: Access to health care is an important issue, particularly in remote areas. Since 2010, 106 rural hospital have closed in the United States, potentially limiting geographic access to health care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of these hospital closures on the proportion of the population who can reach a secondary care facility, by road, within 15, 30, 45, or 60 min. METHODS: Geographical information system analysis, using population data obtained from the 2010 U.S. Census Bureau and hospital data between 2010 and 2019 from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, created 15-, 30-, 45-, and 60-min drive time isochrones (areas from which a central location can be reached within a set time). RESULTS: Rural hospital closures resulted in 0%-0.97% of the population no longer being able to access a hospital within 15 min. The most marked changes were in the East South Central (0.97%, 178,478 residents) and West South Central (0.54%, 197,660 residents) divisions. Lesser degrees of change were noted for longer drive times. The changes were more marked when the rural population was analyzed exclusively. CONCLUSIONS: Recent closures of rural hospitals in the United States have impacted population access to hospital care, although the extent varies. There are regions, such as the Southern and Southeastern United States, which demonstrate greater and potentially more concerning losses in population coverage, probably because of the greater number of closures. Future work should evaluate clinical implications of hospital closures and loss of population coverage.

Using publicly available flight data to analyze health disparities in aeromedical retrieval.

OBJECTIVES: Specialist healthcare cannot be provided in all locations. Helicopters can help to reduce the inherent geographical inequity caused by long distances or difficult terrain. However, the selective use of aeromedical retrieval could lead to other forms of health disparities. The aim of this project was to evaluate such inequities in access to helicopter transport. METHODS: This was a geospatial analysis of publicly available flight tracking data for 18 emergency medical helicopters in the state of Alabama for a 90-day period between March 2019 and June 2019. Data are presented as the number of incidents attended per population, by population (total, insured, and uninsured), as funnel plots, by county. This method allows the identification of positive and negative outliers. RESULTS: We identified 672 likely scene retrieval flights. Twelve counties were probable (outside of 99% confidence interval [CI]) high outliers (more helicopter retrievals than expected), and 4 were possible (outside of 95% CI) high outliers. There were 5 possible low outliers (fewer helicopter retrievals than expected) and 6 probable low outliers. Analysis by insurance status revealed similar results. However, there was no easily discernible geographic pattern to this variability. CONCLUSION: There is considerable geographical variability in the number of helicopter retrievals, with no easily discernable pattern. Some of this variability may be due to differences in injury epidemiology, but others may be due to case selection. However, the present data are insufficient to come to firm conclusions, and additional study is warranted.

Early and prehospital trauma deaths: Who might benefit from advanced resuscitative care?

BACKGROUND: Recent civilian and military data from the United States and the United Kingdom suggest that further reductions in mortality will require prehospital or preoperating room hemorrhage control and blood product resuscitation. The aims of this study were to examine the potential preventability of prehospital and early in-hospital fatalities, and to consider the geographical location of such incidents, to contextualize how the use of advanced resuscitative techniques could be operationalized. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prehospital and early in-hospital trauma deaths from January to December 2017. Data were obtained from the Coroner/ME's Office. Each death was reviewed by a panel of two trauma surgeons and a forensic pathologist. Anatomical and physiological survivabilities were evaluated separately, and then combined, leading to a holistic assessment of preventability. Incident locations were mapped and analyzed using ArcGIS. RESULTS: Three hundred sixteen trauma deaths were identified. Two hundred thirty-one (73%) were deemed anatomically not survivable; 29 (9%) anatomically survivable, but only with hospital care; 43 (14%) anatomically survivable with advanced prehospital care; and 13 (4%) anatomically survivable with basic prehospital care. Physiologically, 114 (36%) of the patients had been dead for some time when found; 137 (43%) had no cardiorespiratory effort on arrival of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) at the scene; 24 (8%) had cardiorespiratory effort at the scene, but not on arrival at the emergency department; and 41 (13%) had cardiorespiratory effort on arrival at the emergency department, but died shortly after. Combining the assessments, 10 (3%) deaths were deemed probably not preventable, 38 (12%) possibly preventable, and the remaining 278 (85%) not preventable. CONCLUSION: Twelve percent of trauma deaths were potentially preventable and might be amenable to advanced resuscitative interventions. Operationalizing this type of care will be challenging and will require either prehospital doctors, or very highly trained paramedics, nurses, or physician assistants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological, level III.

Stop the Bleed: gap analysis and geographical evaluation of incident locations.

BACKGROUND: Trauma is a major public health issue. In 2015, the White House launched the "Stop the Bleed" (STB) campaign, which aims to equip would-be bystanders with the ability and equipment to assist in bleeding emergencies. This study sought to estimate the number of patients who might benefit from STB intervention, in an everyday setting, and their spatial injury profile. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of trauma registry and medical examiners' data, collected between 2013 and 2017. The majority of patients were male. The median age was 32 years. Incidents were geocoded by ZIP code, and mapped using Quantum Geographic Information System (QGIS). RESULTS: We identified 139 patients from medical examiner records and UAB's trauma registry who might have benefitted from STB intervention. The number of incidents per year ranged from 22 to 35, averaging 2.3 incidents per month. There was no evidence of geographical clustering, although the small number of incidents precluded a formal geostatistical analysis. CONCLUSION: The number of patients who might benefit from STB interventions on a daily basis is small, and incident locations are difficult to predict. Educating the public in how to stop bleeding is appealing, but providing easy and widespread access to STB kits may be difficult. Although there are parallels to the provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation for cardiac arrest, there are also differences, which should not be overlooked.

Aeromedical retrieval of trauma patients: Impact of flight path model on estimates of population coverage.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the impact of different flight path models on the calculated population coverage of aeromedical retrieval systems, using the state of Alabama as a case study. METHODS: Geospatial analysis of U.S. Census Bureau population data using helicopter bases and trauma centers as foci of either circular or elliptical coverage areas. RESULTS: Circular isochrone models around helicopter bases or trauma centers suggest that the entire population of Alabama could reach a level I or II trauma center within 60 min. Elliptical isochrones, incorporating outbound and inbound flights, suggest that only 78.8% of the population have ready access to level I or II trauma centers. CONCLUSION: While all three flight path models described have some validity and utility, simplistic circular flight time isochrones around trauma centers and helicopter bases provide overly optimistic estimates of population coverage. The elliptical model provides a more realistic evaluation.

Population Coverage of Trauma Systems: What Do Helicopters Add?

Trauma is a time-critical condition. Helicopters are thought to enhance the accessibility to trauma centers, but this benefit is poorly quantified. The aim of this study was to conduct a geographical analysis of the added benefit provided by helicopters, over ground transport. This study uses geospatial analysis. Helicopter bases and Level I and II designated trauma centers were geocoded. 60-minute drive-time and elliptical flight-time isochrones were mapped with ArcGIS™ (Esri, Redlands, CA). Calculations included allowance for mission ground time (MGT). We compared the proportion of the population that could be taken to Level I and II trauma centers, within 60 minutes, by road and by air. Using a 30-minute MGT model, helicopters permit 279,317 additional residents (5.8%) access to a Level I trauma center within 60 minutes. Using the 20-minute MGT model, 1,089,177 more residents (22.8%) would have access to Level I trauma center care. The benefits were marginally greater for access to Level I and II trauma center care. Helicopters enhance access to specialist trauma center care, but the benefit is small and dependent on MGT. Consideration should be given to the siting of helicopters, particularly in relation to trauma patients, MGT, and the timely response of EMS when determining the triage for helicopter transport.

Use of helicopters for retrieval of trauma patients: A geospatial analysis.

BACKGROUND: Helicopters are widely used to facilitate the transport of trauma patients, from the scene of an incident to the hospital. However, the use of helicopters may not always be appropriate. The aim of this project was to conduct a geospatial analysis of helicopter transport to a Level I trauma center. METHODS: Retrospective geospatial analysis of trauma registry data, 2013 to 2018. We included all adult (≥16) trauma patients brought to the trauma center directly from the scene. Data were geocoded and analyzed using arcGIS. Drive times and flight times were calculated using Google Maps. Flight times included the time required to reach the incident location. RESULTS: Two thousand eight hundred ninety-three patients were identified, and 1,911 had incident locations recorded and were therefore included in the analysis. The median age was 41 years (interquartile range [IQR], 27-58 years). Twenty-four percent of the patients had suffered severe injuries (Injury Severity Score [ISS], 16-25), 17% very severe injuries (ISS > 25), 24% moderately severe injuries, and 36% minor injuries (ISS, 1-8). The overall geographical distribution was centroidal, although with a concentration of case volume in the vicinity, and to the northeast, of the trauma center. Median flight time was 60 minutes (IQR, 52-69 minutes), and median drive time 65 minutes (IQR, 54-86 minutes). In 33% of the patients, the calculated drive time to the trauma center was shorter than the calculated flight time when considering the time for the helicopter to reach the scene. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients taken to our level I trauma center by helicopter are injured in relatively close proximity. One in four patients is severely or very severely injured, but one third of the patients have only minor injuries. Over a quarter of trauma patients might have reached hospital more quickly if they had been taken by road, rather than helicopter. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological/geographical study, level V.

Timed Stair Climbing Is the Single Strongest Predictor of Perioperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Current methods to predict patients' perioperative morbidity use complex algorithms with multiple clinical variables focusing primarily on organ-specific compromise. The aim of the current study was to determine the value of a timed stair climb in predicting perioperative complications for patients undergoing abdominal surgery. STUDY DESIGN: From March 2014 to July 2015, three hundred and sixty-two patients attempted stair climbing while being timed before undergoing elective abdominal surgery. Vital signs were measured before and after stair climb. Ninety-day postoperative complications were assessed by the Accordion Severity Grading System. The prognostic value of stair climb was compared with the American College of Surgeons NSQIP risk calculator. RESULTS: A total of 264 (97.4%) patients were able to complete the stair climb. Stair climb time directly correlated to changes in both mean arterial pressure and heart rate as an indicator of stress. An Accordion grade 2 or higher complication occurred in 84 (25%) patients. There were 8 mortalities (2.4%). Patients with slower stair climb times had increased complication rates (p < 0.0001). In multivariable analysis, stair climb time was the single strongest predictor of complications (odds ratio = 1.029; p < 0.0001), and no other clinical comorbidity reached statistical significance. Receiver operative characteristic curves predicting postoperative morbidity by stair climb time was superior to that of the American College of Surgeons risk calculator (area under the curve = 0.81 vs 0.62; p < 0.0001). Additionally, slower patients had greater deviations from predicted length of hospital stay (p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Stair climb provides measurable stress, accurately predicts postoperative complications, and is easy to administer in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Larger patient populations with a diverse group of operations will be needed to validate the use of stair climbing in risk-prediction models.

A 100% departmental mortality review improves observed-to-expected mortality ratios and University HealthSystem Consortium rankings.

BACKGROUND: Public reporting of mortality, Patient Safety Indicators (PSI) and hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) is the reality of quality measurement. A review of our department's data identified opportunities for improvement. We began a surgeon-led 100% review of mortality, PSIs, and HACs to improve patient care and surgeon awareness of these metrics. STUDY DESIGN: From December 2012 through August 2013, there were 11,899 patients cared for on 12 surgical services. A surgeon from each service led monthly reviews of all mortality, PSIs, or HACs with central reporting of preventability and coding accuracy. We compared the University HealthSystem Consortium observed-to-expected (OE) mortality ratios (mean <1 fewer observed than expected deaths) and University HealthSystem Consortium relative rankings (lower number is better) before and after implementation. Statistical significance was p < 0.05 by Poisson regression. RESULTS: Of the 11,899 patients in the study period, there were 235 deaths, 290 PSIs, and 26 HACs identified and reviewed. The most common PSIs were postoperative deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary thromboembolism (n = 75), respiratory failure (n = 61), hemorrhage/hematoma (n = 33), and accidental puncture/laceration (n = 33). Before December 20, 2012, the OE ratio for mortality was consistently >1, then fell and remained <1 during the study period (p < 0.05). The OE mortality ratio in the fourth quarter of 2012 was 1.14 and fell to 0.88, 0.91, and 0.75 in the first, second, and third quarters of calendar year 2013 (p < 0.05). The overall Inpatient Quality Indicators #90 (composite postoperative mortality rank) rankings increased from 109 of 118 in the third quarter of 2012 to 47 of 119 in the third quarter of 2013. CONCLUSIONS: A surgeon-led systematic review of mortality, PSIs, and HACs improved our OE ratio and University HealthSystem Consortium postsurgical relative rankings. Surgeon engagement and ownership is critical for success.