Impact of waiting time on the quality of life of patients awaiting coronary artery bypass grafting.

BACKGROUND: A lack of resources has created waiting lists for many elective surgical procedures within Canada's universal health care system. Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the treatment of atherosclerotic ischemic heart disease is one of these affected surgical procedures. We studied the impact of waiting times on the quality of life of patients awaiting CABG. METHODS: A prospective cohort of 266 patients from 3 hospitals in Montreal was used. Patients who gave informed consent were followed from the time they were registered for CABG until 6 months after surgery; recruitment began in November 1993, and the last follow-up was completed in July 1995. Patient groups were classified according to the duration of the wait for CABG (< or = 97 days or > 97 days). We measured the following outcomes: quality of life (using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form [SF-36]), incidence of chest pain (using the New York Heart Association angina classification), frequency of symptoms (using the Cardiac Symptom Inventory) and rates of complications and death before and after surgery. RESULTS: There were no differences in quality of life at baseline between the 2 groups. Immediately before surgery, compared with patients who waited 97 days or less, those who waited longer had significantly reduced physical functioning (change from baseline SF-36 score 0 v. -4 respectively, p = 0.001), vitality (change from baseline score -0.1 v. -1.3, p = 0.01), social functioning (change from baseline score 0.4 v. -0.4, p = 0.03) and general health (change from baseline score 1.1 v. -1.7, p = 0.001). At 6 months after surgery, compared with patients who waited 97 days or less for CABG, those who waited longer had reduced physical functioning (change from baseline SF-36 score 4.0 v. -0.1 respectively, p = 0.001), physical role (change from baseline score 0.8 v. 0.0, p = 0.001), vitality (change from baseline score 2.2 v. 0.9, p = 0.001), mental health (change from baseline score 1.2 v. 0.0, p = 0.001) and general health (change from baseline score 1.8 v. -0.3, p = 0.001). The incidence of postoperative adverse events was significantly greater among the patients with longer waits for CABG than among those with shorter waits (32 v. 14 events respectively, p = 0.005). Longer waits before CABG were associated with an increased likelihood of not returning to work after surgery (p = 0.08): 10 (53%) of the 19 patients with longer waiting times remained employed after CABG, as compared with 17 (85%) of the 20 with shorter waiting times. INTERPRETATION: The significant decrease in physical and social functioning, both before and after surgery, for patients waiting more than 3 months for CABG is an important observation. Longer waiting times were also associated with increased postoperative adverse events. By decreasing waiting times for CABG, we may improve patients' quality of life and decrease the psychological morbidity associated with CABG.

Trauma care regionalization: a process-outcome evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Regionalization of trauma care services in our region was initiated in 1993 with the designation of four tertiary trauma centers. The process continued in 1995 with the implementation of patient triage and transfer protocols. Since 1995, the network of trauma care has been expanded with the designation of 33 secondary, 30 primary, and 32 stabilization trauma centers. In addition, during this period emergency medical personnel have been trained to assess and triage trauma victims within minimal prehospital time. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the impact of trauma care regionalization on the mortality of major trauma patients. METHODS: This was a prospective study in which patients were entered at the time of injury and were followed to discharge from the acute-care hospital. The patients were identified from the Quebec Trauma Registry, a review of the records of acute-care hospitals that treat trauma, and records of the emergency medical services in the region. The study sample consisted of all patients fulfilling the criteria of a major trauma, defined as death, or Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 12, or Pre-Hospital Index > 3, or two or more injuries with Abbreviated Injury Scale scores > 2, or hospital stay of more than 3 days. Data collection took place between April 1, 1993, and March 31, 1998. During this period, four distinct phases of trauma care regionalization were defined: pre-regionalization (phase 0), initiation (phase I), intermediate (phase II), and advanced (phase III). RESULTS: A total of 12,208 patients were entered into the study cohort, and they were approximately evenly distributed over the 6 years of the study. During the study period, there was a decline in the mean age of patients from 54 to 46 years, whereas the male/female ratio remained constant at 2:1. There was also an increase in the mean ISS, from 25.5 to 27.5. The proportion of patients injured in motor vehicle collisions increased from less than 45% to more than 50% (p < 0.001). The mortality rate during the phases of regionalization were: phase 0, 52%; phase I, 32%; phase II, 19%; and phase III, 18%. These differences were clinically important and statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Stratified analysis showed a significant decline in mortality among patients with ISS between 12 and 49. The change in mortality for patients with fatal injuries (ISS > or = 50) was not significant. During the study period, the mean prehospital time decreased significantly, from 62 to 44 minutes. The mean time to admission after arrival at the hospital decreased from 151 to 128 minutes (p < 0.001). The latter decrease was primarily attributable to changes at the tertiary centers. The proportion of patients with ISS between 12 and 24 and between 25 and 49 who were treated at tertiary centers increased from 56 to 82% and from 36 to 84%, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared with the secondary and primary centers, throughout the course of the study the mortality rate in the secondary and tertiary centers showed a consistent decline (p < 0.001). In addition, the mortality rate in the tertiary centers remained consistently lower (p < 0.001). The results of multivariate analyses showed that after adjusting for injury severity and patient age, the primary factors contributing to the reduced mortality were treatment at a tertiary center, reduced prehospital time, and direct transport from the scene to tertiary centers. CONCLUSION: This study produced empirical evidence that the integration of trauma care services into a regionalized system reduces mortality. The results showed that tertiary trauma centers and reduced prehospital times are the essential components of an efficient trauma care system.

Ineffectiveness of on-site intravenous lines: is prehospital time the culprit?

The purpose of the present study was to test the association between on-site intravenous fluid replacement and mortality in patients with severe trauma. The effect of prehospital time on this association was also evaluated. The design was that of an observational quasi-experimental study comparing 217 patients who had on-site intravenous fluid replacement (IV group) with an equal number of matched patients for whom this intervention was not performed (no-IV group). The patients were individually matched on their Prehospital Index obtained at the scene and were included in the study if they had an on-site Prehospital Index score > 3 and were transported alive to the hospital. The outcome measure of interest was mortality because of injury. The patients in the IV group had a significantly lower mean age (37 vs. 45 years; p < 0.001) and higher incidence of injuries to the head or neck (46 vs. 32%; p = 0.004), chest (34 vs. 17%; p < 0.001), and abdomen (28 vs. 12%; p < 0.001). The IV group also had a higher proportion of patients injured by motor vehicle crashes (41 vs. 27%; p = 0.003), firearms (9 vs. 2%; p = 0.001), and stabbing (20 vs. 9%; p = 0.001). The rate of extremity injuries (38 vs. 59%; p < 0.001) and falls (12 vs. 40%; p < 0.001) was lower for the IV group. In addition, the mean Injury Severity Score was significantly higher for the IV group (15 vs. 9; p < 0.001). The mortality rates for the IV and no-IV groups were 23 and 6% (p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis showed that after adjusting for patient age, gender, Injury Severity Score, mechanism of injury, and prehospital time, the use of on-site intravenous fluid replacement was associated with a significant increase in the risk of mortality (adjusted odds ratio = 2.3; 95% confidence interval = 1.02-5.28; p = 0.04). To further evaluate the effect of prehospital time on the association between on-site IV use and mortality, the analysis was repeated separately for the following time strata: 0 to 30 minutes, 31 to 60 minutes, and >60 minutes. The adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for these strata were 1.05 (0.08-14.53; p = 0.97), 3.38 (0.84-13.62; p = 0.08), and 8.40 (1.27-54.69; p = 0.03). These results show that for prehospital times of less than 30 minutes, the use of on-site intravenous fluid replacement provides no benefit, and that for longer times, this intervention is associated with significant increases in the risk of mortality. The results of this observational study have shown that the use of on-site intravenous fluid replacement is associated with an increase in mortality risk and that this association is exacerbated by, but is not solely the result of, increased prehospital times. Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that early intravenous fluid replacement is harmful because it disrupts the normal physiologic response to severe bleeding. Although this evidence is against the implementation of on-site intravenous fluid replacement for severely injured patients, further studies including randomized controlled trials are required to provide a definitive answer to this question.

Preventable death evaluation of the appropriateness of the on-site trauma care provided by Urgences-Santé physicians.

The study is based on 44 preventable deaths occurring in a cohort of 360 patients with major trauma. These cases were reviewed by a committee of nine experts. The mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 28, and most cases had injuries to the head/neck (68%) and chest (64%). The mean (+/- SD) observed prehospital times, and those considered the maximum allowable by the committee, were 40.6 +/- 12.0 minutes for head/neck injuries and 23.9 +/- 12.2 minutes for chest injuries (p < 0.05). Intravenous (i.v.) lines were started in 38 (86%) of the patients. The committee classified this procedure as harmful for 16 (42%) and neutral for 19 (50%). Among the 18 (46%) that were intubated, this intervention was considered harmful for 17% and neutral for 39%. In two of the three patients for whom a pneumatic antishock garment was applied, this procedure was considered harmful. Of the 34 patients that required direct transport at a level I trauma center, 50% were transferred to such a hospital. These results show significant prehospital delays and high rates of inappropriate IV line initiation and intubation in trauma patients receiving on-site care by physicians. We conclude that prehospital care protocols for trauma patients should emphasize prompt transport and specific on-site care algorithms.

Trauma center designation: initial impact on trauma-related mortality.

The movement towards trauma care regionalization in Québec was initiated in 1990, with formal designation of three level I trauma centers in 1993. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of trauma center designation on mortality. The study design is that of a two-cohort study, one assembled during 1987 when designation was not in effect, and the other during the first 5 months of designation. The study focuses on patients that fulfilled the following criteria: i) arrived alive at the hospital, and ii) were admitted. The outcome measures are adjusted mortality, and excess mortality as measured by the TRISS methodology. A total of 158 patients treated in 1987, and 288 treated in 1993, were identified. The mean age of the patients treated in 1993 was significantly higher (40.0, +/- 18.1), when compared with the 1987 group (30.9 +/- 18.1; p < 0.001). Patients in the 1987 cohort had a significantly higher proportion of injuries caused by stabbing (p = 0.02), and a significantly lower proportion caused by falls (p = 0.003). The 1987 cohort had a higher rate of abdominal injuries (p = 0.0001), and external injuries (p = 0.0001), and a significantly lower rate of head or neck injuries (p = 0.003), and injuries to the extremities (p = 0.0001). The mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) for the 1987 cohort was 14.96 (+/- 12.36), and 15.49 (+/- 11.61) in 1993 (p = 0.65). The crude mortality rate was 20% for 1987, and 10% for 1993. The crude odds ratio for mortality in 1987 was 2.10 with 95% confidence intervals between 1.22 and 3.62 (p = 0.006).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Preventable death classification: interrater reliability and comparison with ISS-based survival probability estimates.

The purpose of the study was to compare the injury-related threat to survival estimated by the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and a committee of experts. The charts of 116 (73 fatalities and 43 survivors) patients with severe injuries were reviewed. A committee of nine clinicians classified each case as survivable, potentially survivable, and nonsurvivable based on anatomical descriptors, mechanism of injury, and patient's age. Majority was used to determine the final committee classification. Based on the ISS values, cases were classified as survivable (9-24), potentially survivable (25-49), and nonsurvivable (> 49). The results showed poor interrater reliability among the nine clinicians with an overall intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.43. The ISS-based classification had high agreement with the final committee classification (overall weighted kappa = 0.71). Lower agreement was observed for falls and with increasing number of injuries. This study has demonstrated no additional benefit for using a committee to classify injury severity on the basis of anatomical damage over applying ISS-based survival probabilities. The continued use of the ISS is supported.