The "non-preventable" preventable transfer? An analysis of the care from support services that injured children transferred to a level 1 pediatric trauma center receive.

PURPOSE: Almost 30% of pediatric trauma transfers to our facility have previously been shown to be potentially preventable transfers (PT). However, we sought to evaluate what care from support services these PT received during admission. METHODS: Traumatically injured children transferred between January 2014 and June 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. A PT was defined as a child who was discharged within 36 h of arrival without surgical intervention or advanced imaging studies. PT that received support services were compared to those that did not to determine which patients may benefit from these services were their transfers prevented. RESULTS: There were 3212 transfers, and 927 (29%) were PT. When compared to non-PT, PT were younger, closer to our hospital, and had a lower ISS, extremity or C-spine injury, or assault/non-accidental trauma mechanism. PT were less likely to have a chest injury or a CT at the referring hospital. Of the PT, 30% had a support service consulted. PT with higher ISS or a head injury was more likely to receive a consultation with a support service. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of these "preventable" transfers still receive important care from support services during their admission. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Pediatric trauma telemedicine in a rural state: Lessons learned from a 1-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Previous research from our center has shown that 27% of the pediatric trauma transfers from referring facilities are potentially preventable. Our hospital is the only level 1 pediatric trauma center (PTC) in our state, and we are developing a pediatric trauma telehealth network to help keep certain injured children closer to home. We instituted a pediatric trauma telehealth program with a partnering community-based hospital in our state and aim to report our experience over the first year. METHODS: All pediatric trauma patients that presented to our partnering hospital from January 2019 to February 2020 were reviewed. Disposition was: a) telehealth consultation, b) admission to the children's unit without a telehealth consultation per our head trauma protocol, or c) transfer without telehealth consultation. Data on demographics, hospital course, and disposition were collected via chart review. RESULTS: Eight patients underwent telehealth consults and another 8 patients were admitted to the partnering hospital's children's unit based on the head trauma protocol without a telehealth consult. Patient's ages ranged from 7 months to 15 years. Of the patients that underwent telehealth consult, 7 presented with a head injury and 1 presented with a rib fracture/small pneumothorax. The patient with a pneumothorax was observed for 6 h and discharged home after a repeat chest x-ray was stable. All 15 patients with head injuries were observed and discharged from either the emergency department or children's unit after passing concussion testing. No patients required transfer to our PTC after observation, and none were readmitted. Fifty-six patients were transferred without telehealth consultation, and 3 of these patients could potentially have avoided transfer with a telehealth consultation. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth in pediatric trauma can be a safe mechanism for preventing the transfer of patients that can be safely observed at a partnering hospital. From a facility that transfers an average of 30 trauma patients per year to our hospital, this program prevented 16 such transfers. Development of a head trauma protocol in collaboration with a pediatric neurosurgeon leads to an unexpected number of patients being admitted to the partnering hospital for observation without utilization of a telehealth consultation. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.