Community-Level Disadvantage of Adults With Firearm- vs Motor Vehicle-Related Injuries.

Importance: Motor vehicle crash (MVC) and firearm injuries are 2 of the top 3 mechanisms of adult injury-related deaths in the US. Objective: To understand the differing associations between community-level disadvantage and firearm vs MVC injuries to inform mechanism-specific prevention strategies and appropriate postdischarge resource allocation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cross-sectional study analyzed prospectively collected data from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Firearm Study. Included patients were treated either for firearm injury between March 1, 2021, and February 28, 2022, or for MVC-related injuries between January 1 and December 31, 2021, at 1 of 128 participating ACS trauma centers. Exposures: Community distress. Main outcome and Measure: Odds of presenting with a firearm as compared with MVC injury based on levels of community distress, as measured by the Distressed Communities Index (DCI) and categorized in quintiles. Results: A total of 62 981 patients were included (mean [SD] age, 42.9 [17.7] years; 42 388 male [67.3%]; 17 737 Black [28.2%], 9052 Hispanic [14.4%], 36 425 White [57.8%]) from 104 trauma centers. By type, there were 53 474 patients treated for MVC injuries and 9507 treated for firearm injuries. Patients with firearm injuries were younger (median [IQR] age, 31.0 [24.0-40.0] years vs 41.0 [29.0-58.0] years); more likely to be male (7892 of 9507 [83.0%] vs 34 496 of 53 474 [64.5%]), identified as Black (5486 of 9507 [57.7%] vs 12 251 of 53 474 [22.9%]), and Medicaid insured or uninsured (6819 of 9507 [71.7%] vs 21 310 of 53 474 [39.9%]); and had a higher DCI score (median [IQR] score, 74.0 [53.2-94.8] vs 58.0 [33.0-83.0]) than MVC injured patients. Among admitted patients, the odds of presenting with a firearm injury compared with MVC injury were 1.50 (95% CI, 1.35-1.66) times higher for patients living in the most distressed vs least distressed ZIP codes. After controlling for age, sex, race, ethnicity, and payer type, the DCI components associated with the highest adjusted odds of presenting with a firearm injury were a high housing vacancy rate (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.19) and high poverty rate (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10-1.24). Among patients sustaining firearm injuries patients, 4333 (54.3%) received no referrals for postdischarge rehabilitation, home health, or psychosocial services. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of adults with firearm- and motor vehicle-related injuries, we found that patients from highly distressed communities had higher odds of presenting to a trauma center with a firearm injury as opposed to an MVC injury. With two-thirds of firearm injury survivors treated at trauma centers being discharged without psychosocial services, community-level measures of disadvantage may be useful for allocating postdischarge care resources to patients with the greatest need.

Characteristics of Firearm Injury by Injury Intent: The Need for Tailored Interventions.

INTRODUCTION: While the U.S. has high quality data on firearm-related deaths, less information is available on those who arrive at trauma centers alive, especially those discharged from the emergency department. This study sought to describe characteristics of patients arriving to trauma centers alive following a firearm injury, postulating that significant differences in firearm injury intent might provide insights into injury prevention strategies. METHODS: This was a multi-center prospective cohort study of patients treated for firearm-related injuries at 128 U.S. trauma centers from 3/2021-2/2022. Data collected included patient-level sociodemographic, injury and clinical characteristics, community characteristics, and context of injury. The outcome of interest was the association between these factors and the intent of firearm injury. Measures of urbanicity, community distress, and strength of state firearm laws were utilized to characterize patient communities. RESULTS: 15,232 patients presented with firearm-related injuries across 128 centers in 41 states. Overall, 9.5% of patients died, and deaths were more common among law enforcement and self-inflicted (SI) firearm injuries (80.9% and 50.5%, respectively). These patients were also more likely to have a history of mental illness. SI firearm injuries were more common in older White men from rural and less distressed communities, whereas firearm assaults were more common in younger, Black men from urban and more distressed communities. Unintentional injuries were more common among younger patients and in states with lower firearm safety grades whereas law enforcement-related injuries occurred most often in unemployed patients with a history of mental illness. CONCLUSIONS: Injury, clinical, sociodemographic, and community characteristics among patients injured by a firearm significantly differed between intents. With the goal of reducing firearm-related deaths, strategies and interventions need to be tailored to include community improvement and services that address specific patient risk factors for firearm injury intent. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Prognostic/Epidemiological.

Firearm injuries in Missouri.

Firearm deaths continue to be a major public health problem, but the number of non-fatal firearm injuries and the characteristics of patients and injuries is not well known. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma, with support from the National Collaborative on Gun Violence Research, leveraged an existing data system to capture lethal and non-lethal injuries, including patients treated and discharged from the emergency department and collect additional data on firearm injuries that present to trauma centers. In 2020, Missouri had the 4th highest firearm mortality rate in the country at 23.75/100,000 population compared to 13.58/100,000 for the US overall. We examined the characteristics of patients from Missouri with firearm injuries in this cross-sectional study. Of the overall 17,395 patients, 1,336 (7.7%) were treated at one of the 11 participating trauma centers in Missouri during the 12-month study period. Patients were mostly male and much more likely to be Black and uninsured than residents in the state as a whole. Nearly three-fourths of the injuries were due to assaults, and overall 7.7% died. Few patients received post-discharge services.

Firearm Injuries treated at Trauma Centers in the United States.

BACKGROUND: While firearm injuries and deaths continue to be a major public health problem, the number of non-fatal firearm injuries and the characteristics of patients is not well known. The American College of Surgeons (ACS) Committee on Trauma leveraged an existing data system to collect additional data on fatal and non-fatal firearm injuries presenting to trauma centers. This report provides an overview of this initiative and highlights the challenges associated with capturing actionable data on firearm-injured patients. METHODS: 128 trauma centers that are part of the ACS Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) collected data on individuals of any age arriving alive between March 1, 2021 and February 28, 2022 with a firearm injury. In addition to the standard data collected for TQIP, abstractors also extracted additional data specific to this study. We linked data from the Distressed Community Index (DCI) to patient records using zip code of residence. RESULTS: A total of 17,395 patients were included, with mean (SD) age of 30.2 (13.5) years, 82.5% were male and the majority were Black and non-Hispanic. The mean proportion of variables with missing data varied among trauma centers, with a mean of 20.7% missing data. Injuries occurred most commonly in homes (31.2%) or on the street (26.6%); 70.4% of injuries were due to assaults. Nearly one-third of patients were discharged from the ED, 25.9% were admitted directly to the operating room, 10.9% to the ICU; 5.9% died in the ED and 10.3% died overall during their course of care. Nearly two-thirds of patients lived in the two highest distressed categories of communities; only 7.5% lived in the least distressed quintile. CONCLUSIONS: Utilizing trauma center data can be a valuable tool to improve our knowledge of firearm injuries if clinical practices and documentation of patient risks and circumstances are standardized. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III Level, epidemiological.