Stop the Bleed® in medical schools: Early advocacy and promising results.

OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that medical students would be empowered by hemorrhage-control training and would support efforts to include Stop the Bleed® (STB) in medical education. DESIGN: This is a multi-institution survey study. Surveys were administered immediately following and 6 months after the course. SETTING: This study took place at the Association of American Medical Colleges-accredited medical schools in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were first-year medical students at participating institutions. A total of 442 students completed post-course surveys, and 213 students (48.2 percent) also completed 6-month follow-up surveys. INTERVENTION: An 1-hour, in-person STB course. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Student empowerment was measured by Likert-scale scoring, 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). The usage of hemorrhage-control skills was also measured. RESULTS: A total of 419 students (95.9 percent) affirmed that the course taught the basics of bleeding control, and 169 (79.3 percent) responded positively at follow-up, with a significant decrease in Likert response (4.65, 3.87, p < 0.001). Four hundred and twenty-three students (97.0 percent) affirmed that they would apply bleeding control skills to a patient, and 192 (90.1 percent) responded positively at follow-up (4.61, 4.19, p < 0.001). Three hundred and sixty-one students (82.8 percent) believed that they were able to save a life, and 109 (51.2 percent) responded positively at follow-up (4.14, 3.56, p < 0.001). Four hundred and twenty-five students (97.0 percent) would recommend the course to another medical student, and 196 (92.0 percent) responded positively at follow-up (4.68, 4.31, p < 0.001). Six students (2.8 percent) used skills on live patients, with success in five of the six instances. CONCLUSIONS: Medical students were empowered by STB and have used hemorrhage-control skills on live victims. Medical students support efforts to include STB in medical education.

Using aortic arch short axis views during transesophageal echocardiographic examination facilitates right ventricular assist device imaging.

Given the increased need for mechanical circulatory support and subsequent development of right ventricular assist devices (RVAD), appropriate imaging needs to be described to facilitate care in patients with cardiogenic shock and heart failure. We present three cases in which the upper esophageal aortic arch short axis (UE AA SAX) view on transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was utilized to effectively image RVADs: to confirm normal positioning, to detect and guide repositioning, and to visualize malfunction. These cases support the importance of the UE AA SAX TEE view in RVAD outflow imaging and, when obtainable, should be included in routine RVAD assessment.

ABO blood groups do not predict progression of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage.

ABO blood groups are associated with genetically predisposed variations in von Willebrand factor (VWF) resulting in higher risks of thrombotic events in non-O blood types and bleeding complications in blood type O. The role of ABO blood groups in progression of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (TICH) is unknown. Given statistically lower VWF levels in blood type O in the general population, we hypothesized that blood type O patients have a higher risk of such progression. A retrospective review of adult trauma patients with isolated TICH admitted to a Level 1 trauma center over eight years was conducted. Patients were categorized with blood type O and non-O (types A, B, AB) delineation. The primary outcome was radiological progression of TICH during the first 24 h. Secondary outcomes included surgical intervention after follow-up computed tomography (CT), complications, days on mechanical ventilation (DMV), intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and mortality. Of 949 patients, 432 (45.5%) had blood type O. When comparing O and non-O groups, no significant differences were found in gender, age, race, admission vital signs, Glasgow Coma Scale, coagulation profile, TICH type, or Injury Severity Score. No difference in TICH progression was found between O and non-O groups: 73 (17%) vs 80 (15%), respectively, p = 0.55. Blood type O mortality was 12 (3% vs. 23 (4%), p = 0.174). Rate of TICH surgical intervention after follow-up CT, DMV, complications, and ICU and hospital LOS did not differ. No association between ABO blood types and radiological progression of TICH was identified.

The Challenges of Using ICD codes to Perform a Comparative Analysis between Patients with Penetrating Cardiac Injuries who Underwent Non-Resuscitative Thoracotomy versus Sternotomy.

Background: Comparative morbidity after either sternotomy or non-resuscitative thoracotomy in penetrating cardiac injuries (PCI) is unknown. Methods: Retrospective review of adults with PCI who underwent either sternotomy or non-resuscitative thoracotomy using the National Trauma Data Bank 2007-2015. Since there is no unique International Classification of Diseases Procedure Coding System (ICD-PCS) codes assigned for resuscitative vs. non-resuscitative thoracotomy, and both procedures were coded as "thoracotomy", propensity score (PS) methods were applied to avoid inclusion of resuscitative thoracotomy. Results: Despite well PS matching on injury severity score the non-thoracotomy group compared to the sternotomy group had a significantly increased risk of mortality (30 percent vs 8 percent, p<0.0001). The morbidity differed as well-25 percent vs. 12 percent, p=0.0007. Conclusions: The differences in mortality in PCI patients who underwent non-resuscitative thoracotomy vs. sternotomy may be biased by unintentional inclusion of resuscitative thoracotomy. To accurately capture thoracotomy type, separate unique resuscitative and non-resuscitative thoracotomy procedure codes should be created in future revisions of the ICD PCS.

Is it safe to admit patients with acute injuries to nonsurgical services? A retrospective review.

BACKGROUND: Given potential safety risks when admitting injured patients to nonsurgical services (NSS), the American College of Surgeons mandates trauma centers justification. However, evidence supporting this requirement is lacking. METHODS: Adult patients cleared for admission to a NSS at a level 1 trauma center between 2012 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographic, injury, and outcome characteristics were compared between nonsurgical (NSA) and surgical admission patients and analyzed for predictive value. RESULTS: Compared with surgical admission patients, NSA patients were significantly older, had a higher number of comorbidities and/or patient and a lower Injury Severity Score, while hospital length of stay, complications, and missed injury and adjusted mortality rates were similar. NSA did not predict mortality whereas increased age, increased Injury Severity Score, and number of comorbidities and/or patient did. CONCLUSIONS: As all complications and mortalities were unrelated to injuries per se, admission to a NSS, after protocoled clearance by a trauma or Emergency Department attending, appears to be safe.