A joinpoint analysis examining trends in firearm injuries at six us trauma centers from 2016 to 2022.

BACKGROUND: There is an epidemic of firearm injuries in the United States since the mid-2000s. Thus, we sought to examine whether hospitalization from firearm injuries have increased over time, and to examine temporal changes in patient demographics, firearm injury intent, and injury severity. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study of patients hospitalized with a traumatic injury to six US level I trauma centers between 1/1/2016 and 6/30/2022. ICD-10-CM cause codes were used to identify and describe firearm injuries. Temporal trends were compared for demographics (age, sex, race, insured status), intent (assault, unintentional, self-harm, legal intervention, and undetermined), and severity (death, ICU admission, severe injury (injury severity score ≥ 16), receipt of blood transfusion, mechanical ventilation, and hospital and ICU LOS (days). Temporal trends were examined over 13 six-month intervals (H1, January-June; H2, July-December) using joinpoint regression and reported as semi-annual percent change (SPC); significance was p < 0.05. RESULTS: Firearm injuries accounted for 2.6% (1908 of 72,474) of trauma hospitalizations. The rate of firearm injuries initially declined from 2016-H1 to 2018-H2 (SPC = - 4.0%, p = 0.002), followed by increased rates from 2018-H2 to 2020-H1 (SPC = 9.0%, p = 0.005), before stabilizing from 2020-H1 to 2022-H1 (0.5%, p = 0.73). NH black patients had the greatest hospitalization rate from firearm injuries (14.0%) and were the only group to demonstrate a temporal increase (SPC = 6.3%, p < 0.001). The proportion of uninsured patients increased (SPC = 2.3%, p = 0.02) but there were no temporal changes by age or sex. ICU admission rates declined (SPC = - 2.2%, p < 0.001), but ICU LOS increased (SPC = 2.8%, p = 0.04). There were no significant changes over time in rates of death (SPC = 0.3%), severe injury (SPC = 1.6%), blood transfusion (SPC = 0.6%), and mechanical ventilation (SPC = 0.6%). When examined by intent, self-harm injuries declined over time (SPC = - 4.1%, p < 0.001), assaults declined through 2019-H2 (SPC = - 5.6%, p = 0.01) before increasing through 2022-H1 (SPC = 6.5%, p = 0.01), while undetermined injuries increased through 2019-H1 (SPC = 24.1%, p = 0.01) then stabilized (SPC = - 4.5%, p = 0.39); there were no temporal changes in unintentional injuries or legal intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalizations from firearm injuries are increasing following a period of declines, driven by increases among NH Black patients. Trauma systems need to consider these changing trends to best address the needs of the injured population.

An analysis of missed injuries at a level 1 trauma center with a tertiary survey protocol.

BACKGROUND: Tertiary surveys can help identify missed injuries, but how and when to conduct them remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of a policy requiring tertiary survey completion within 24 h post-admission. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed with a pre-intervention time-period of 8/1/2019-1/31/2020, where tertiary surveys were performed prior to discharge (n = 762). During the post-intervention time-period of 8/1/2020-1/31/21 tertiary surveys were performed within 24 h of admission (n = 651). RESULTS: Missed injury (1.6% [n = 12] vs. 1.5% [n = 10]; p = 0.953) and mortality rates (3.1% vs. 3.7%, p = 0.579) were similar between the pre- and post-intervention groups. Tertiary survey completion rates were higher (86.8% vs. 80.2%; p = 0.001) and exams performed earlier (1[1-1] vs. 1 [1-2] day, p < 0.001) in the post-intervention group. For those with missed injuries, time to injury identification and number of injuries identified on tertiary survey was unchanged. CONCLUSION: Requiring tertiary surveys within 24 h of admission can help identify and correct missed injuries, but standardization of the tertiary survey process and documentation may be as important as the timing.

A Tale of Two Campuses? An Analysis of Two Affiliated Medical School Campuses With Different Match Rates in General Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare factors that contribute to increased match rates into general surgery. DESIGN: Survey study. SETTING: University of Kansas School of Medicine Campuses. PARTICIPANTS: A survey assessing experiences and perceptions during their surgical clerkship was sent to graduating medical students from a single university with a hybrid (academic-affiliated community-based) campus, and an academic campus. Specific questions were asked with regard to residents and attendings, procedural experiences, perceived lifestyle, and general interest in surgery before and after clerkship. RESULTS: The match rate into general surgery was significantly higher on the hybrid campus (14.7% vs 4.0%, p = 0.215). Factors that were positively correlated with interest in surgery included interactions with attendings (0.86) and residents (0.63), time spent in the OR (0.77), participation in the OR (0.62), and complexity of cases (0.61). Students on the hybrid campus spent more weeks on general surgery services (6 vs 4, p < 0.001). More students from the hybrid campus were "Not interested at all" in surgery prior to their surgery clerkship (26.5% vs 16.0). Significantly more academic students indicated they were "Not interested at all" in surgery after their surgery clerkship (52.0 vs 17.6%), while more students on the hybrid campus indicated they were "extremely interested" (29.4 vs 12.0%, p = 0.005) after their surgery clerkship. CONCLUSION: The rate of students matching into general surgery between the 2 campuses are different, with the hybrid campus having nearly 4 times the rate of students matching into general surgery. Programs may be able to increase their match rate by allowing students more opportunities to participate in the operating room, spending more time on a general surgery service, and by ensuring that medical students are included as members of the surgical team.