Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) may also have a place outside major trauma centers - A case report from a Finnish rural hospital.

The recent adoption of endovascular and hybrid methods in the management of massive bleeding following trauma to the torso and junctional areas has been a major advance in trauma care. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is one tool to tackle immediate exsanguination in such cases. To take advantage of such methods, rapid femoral artery access is crucial. In rural hospitals a trauma surgeon, vascular surgeon and interventional radiologist may not be in the hospital during on-call hours. Furthermore, gaining femoral arterial access is an infrequent procedure for a trauma surgeon working outside major trauma centers. Therefore, it might be difficult to acquire and maintain the requisite skills. However, a consultant anesthesiologist is a member of the trauma team and always on call in our hospital. An experienced anesthesiologist is a valuable asset in ultrasound guided arterial punctures and in inserting intravascular introducer sheaths, as was the case in our patient. To our knowledge, anesthesiologists do not commonly participate in the actual placement of arterial introducer sheaths for REBOA catheters in trauma teams. We wish to bring to notice this hidden asset when a team that does not routinely include a vascular surgeon or an interventional radiologist is treating a seriously injured trauma patient. We report on a patient who had sustained a shrapnel injury to the groin with massive blood loss. To stop further bleeding and to stabilize hemodynamics, we used REBOA to gain proximal control of the bleeding. As a result, the patient avoided surgical retroperitoneal exposure and a dry surgical field was created. We conclude that REBOA may also have a place in rural hospitals, and that, if necessary, trauma team members may adopt novel roles in the treatment of hemorrhage.

Finnish translation and external validation of the Trauma Quality of Life questionnaire.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Major trauma impairs health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The aim of this study was the Finnish translation and external validation of the Trauma Quality of Life (TQoL) questionnaire. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Finnish version of the TQoL questionnaire and the 15D, a generic HRQoL questionnaire, were sent by mail to 417 patients identified from the Helsinki Trauma Registry. RESULTS: Altogether 222 patients (53.2%) returned the questionnaires. Participants' mean age was 49.9 ± 18.1 years and 68.8% were males. The mean 15D score was significantly lower than that of the age- and sex-standardized general Finnish population (0.817 vs. 0.918, p < 0.001). The correlation between the Finnish translation and 15D scores was high (0.805). Factor analysis revealed that the Finnish TQoL questionnaire and the 15D have four common factors. Internal validation identified some differences between the Finnish and the original versions. CONCLUSIONS: The correlation between the Finnish TQoL questionnaire and the 15D was high. The factor structures of the original and Finnish versions of the TQoL questionnaire were not identical, which may be a consequence of cultural or patient population differences.Implications for rehabilitationTrauma causes a long-term decrease in health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and this impact should be assessed in rehabilitation.The Trauma-Specific Quality of Life (TQoL) questionnaire has many shared features with the generic HRQoL questionnaire, but it also contains features related to post-traumatic disorder syndrome.The TQoL questionnaire is a valid tool for monitoring HRQoL after trauma.

Incidence of pediatric injury visits decreased while trauma surgeries remained stable during the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in Finland: a register-based study.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has reduced pediatric emergency department (ED) visits and surgeries. This study evaluates the incidence of pediatric trauma ED visits and surgeries in Finland during the first and second waves of the pandemic. Methods: Three large Finnish hospitals, covering one-sixth of the Finnish pediatric population, participated. Data on all ED visits and trauma surgeries between January 2017 and December 2020 were collected from hospital discharge registers. Monthly incidences with 95% CI were calculated per 100 000 person-months by Poisson exact method and compared by incidence rate ratio (IRR). Results: During the lockdown the incidence of head injuries (IRR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.87), sprains (IRR 0.25, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.46), and fractures (IRR 0.36, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.51) decreased in the 13-17 years age group. In the 4-12 years age group a 55% decrease (IRR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.96) in head injuries was observed. During the period of regional restrictions a subtle decrease in head injuries was seen in the 13-17 years age group (IRR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.78). During the lockdown in March 2020 the incidence of fractures decreased in the oldest age group (13-17 years) (IRR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.85), while a rebound in incidence was seen at the end of the lockdown period in June. Conclusion: The nationwide lockdown and the cancellation of sports and other hobbies markedly decreased the injuries among children aged 13-17 years, while the decrease was lower among children aged 4-12 years. Cancellation of sports and hobbies did not affect patients under 4 years of age.

Major blunt trauma causes increased mortality up to 12 years: Long-term survival in 3 557 patients compared to 35 502 control persons.

BACKGROUND: Trauma registries usually report 30-day or in-hospital mortality as an outcome measure. However, some studies criticize this measure as inadequate; the impact of a major trauma could last longer than 1 month after the injury. We studied the long-term mortality of patients who sustained a major trauma. METHODS: The Helsinki University Hospital's trauma registry was used for patient identification from 2006 to 2015 (New Injury Severity Score ≥ 16 and blunt mechanism of injury). For each trauma registry patient, 10 control persons matched by age, sex, and county of residency were obtained from the Population Register Center of Finland. Cause of death information was obtained from Statistics Finland. RESULTS: We included 3 557 trauma registry patients and 35 502 control persons. Follow-up ranged from 1 year 7 months to 11 years 7 months. The 1-year mortality was 11 times higher in the trauma-patient group (22% vs. 2%). The long-term (approximately 12 years) mortality after the injury was 2.6 times higher in the trauma-patient group (46% vs. 18%). For patients surviving at least 1 year post-trauma, the mortality at 12 years was 2.2 times higher than in the control group (31% vs. 14 %). The cause of death was a disease in 73.3% of the trauma patients and 93.6% of the controls. Accidents were more often a cause of death in the patient population than in the control population (21.2% vs. 4.1%). Suicide was the cause of death in 3.0% of patients and 1.1% in controls. Several factors associated with increased mortality were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Major trauma patients had significantly higher long-term mortality compared to controls. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study on this subject with a follow up of this duration with patients this severely injured and a cohort this large.

Evaluation of a routine follow-up visit after an internal fixation of proximal femoral fracture.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Post-operative follow-up after internal fixation of fractures is a common practice. The goal of this study was to evaluate the necessity of a routine follow-up visit after internal fixation of a proximal femoral fracture. Our hypothesis is that these follow-up visits do not result in a change in the treatment plan, but add an extra cost to the health care system and lead to the purposeless utilisation of limited resources. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study of 428 consecutive patients (431 fractures) with a scheduled outpatient clinic visit after internal fixation of proximal femoral fractures in a single hospital during years 2012-2013. We noted any changes in the patients' treatment plans based on the first follow-up visits, including scheduled visits up to ten weeks after internal fixation. RESULTS: None of the patients showed signs of infection, implant failure or loss of reduction requiring re-operation at the scheduled follow-up visit. In only one (0.23%) visit a change in treatment plan was made as a result of the scheduled follow-up visit (decision to remove the distal screws from the long intramedullary nail to obtain dynamic compression). Scheduled visits did not occur for the following reasons, death (11.8%), visit to emergency department prior scheduled visit (3.2%), and not known (3.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The first scheduled visit within ten weeks after internal fixation of a proximal femoral fracture leads to no changes in treatment. We recommend considering the need of these follow-up visits.