David Clas

Elderly trauma patients with rib fractures are at greater risk of death and pneumonia

BACKGROUND The purpose of this study was to show that elderly patients admitted with rib fractures after blunt trauma have increased mortality. METHODS Demographic, injury severity, and outcome data on a cohort of consecutive adult trauma admissions with rib fractures to a tertiary care trauma center from April 1, 1993, to March 31, 2000, were extracted from our trauma registry. RESULTS Among 4,325 blunt trauma admissions, there were 405 (9.4%) patients with rib fractures; 113 were aged > or = 65. Injuries were severe, with Injury Severity Score (ISS) > or = 16 in 54.8% of cases, a mean hospital stay of 26.8 +/- 43.7 days, and 28.6% of patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Mortality (19.5% vs. 9.3%; p < 0.05), presence of comorbidity (61.1% vs. 8.6%; p < 0.0001), and falls (14.6% vs. 0.7%; p < 0.0001) were significantly higher in patients aged > or = 65 despite significantly lower ISS (p = 0.031), higher Glasgow Coma Scale score (p = 0.0003), and higher Revised Trauma Score (p < 0.0001). After adjusting for severity (i.e., ISS and Revised Trauma Score), comorbidity, and multiple rib fractures, patients aged > or = 65 had five times the odds of dying when compared with those < 65 years old. CONCLUSION Despite lower indices of injury severity, even after taking account of comorbidities, mortality was significantly increased in elderly patients admitted to a trauma center with rib fractures.

Preinjury warfarin use among elderly patients with closed head injuries in a trauma center.

BACKGROUND This study aimed to determine the impact of warfarin use on the severity of injury among elderly patients presenting with closed head injuries. METHODS A cohort of patients 55 years of age or older with closed head injuries taken to a tertiary trauma center between April 1993 and March 2001 was retrospectively identified. Patient characteristics, mechanism of injury, type and severity of injury, and hospital survival data were obtained from the trauma registry. Each case then was reviewed for completeness of information, assessment of preinjury warfarin use, and comorbidity. RESULTS Among the 384 patients presenting with closed head injuries, 35 (9%) were receiving warfarin before their trauma. As compared with nonusers, anticoagulated patients had a higher frequency of isolated head trauma (54% vs. 32%; p = 0.008), more severe head injuries (65.7% vs. 44.1%; p = 0.02), and a higher rate of mortality (40% vs. 21%, p = 0.01). These associations remained evident even after population differences in age, gender, comorbidities, and mechanism of injury were taken into account. Indeed, according to multivariate logistic regression models, warfarin use was associated with a statistically significant risk of death (odds ratio [OR], 2.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-6.12), statistically significant odds for more severe head injury (OR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.10-5.17), and odds for isolated head injury that almost reached statistical significance (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 0.82-3.90). CONCLUSIONS Among patients 55 years of age or older who present with closed head injury, the use of warfarin before trauma appears to be associated with a higher frequency of isolated head trauma, more severe head trauma, and a higher likelihood of death. The findings of this retrospective study support the concern about the adverse effects of anticoagulants in cases of head trauma.

Impact of deferred treatment of blunt diaphragmatic rupture: A 15-year experience in six trauma centers in Quebec

BACKGROUND The purpose of this study was to show that blunt diaphragmatic rupture does not require immediate emergency operation in the absence of other indications. METHODS We reviewed all patients with blunt diaphragmatic rupture admitted within 24 hours of injury to one of six university trauma centers providing trauma care for the province of Quebec from April 1, 1984, to March 31, 1999. Multivariate analysis of demographic profiles, severity indices, indications for operation, and preoperative delays was performed. RESULTS There were 160 patients (91 men and 69 women) with blunt diaphragmatic rupture. Mean age was 40.1 +/- 16.2 years. Mean Injury Severity Score was 26.9 +/- 11.5 and mortality was 14.4%. Patients undergoing emergency surgery for indications other than diaphragmatic rupture had a significantly higher Injury Severity Score than those undergoing surgery for repair of diaphragmatic rupture alone (34.7 +/- 10.7 vs. 22.0 +/- 9.0, p < 0.001). In patients undergoing surgery for diaphragmatic rupture alone, delay before repair of the diaphragmatic hernia did not lead to an increased mortality compared with patients undergoing immediate surgery (3.4% vs. 5.0%, p = NS). CONCLUSION Blunt diaphragmatic rupture in the absence of other surgical injuries carries low mortality. Operative repair of diaphragmatic rupture can be deferred without appreciable increased mortality if no other indication mandates immediate surgery.

Evolution in the management of the complex liver injury at a Level I trauma center.

BACKGROUND Management of the severe liver injury evolved from mandatory surgical repair to a more selective approach. This paper reviews the changes in management of the severe liver injury at a Level I trauma center. METHODS We reviewed the records of patients with severe liver injury admitted to a Level I trauma center between January 1984 and December 1995. The patients were divided into two groups, G1 and G2, based on their date of admission before or after January 1991. The two groups were compared for blood products use, management of the liver injury, and outcome. RESULTS One hundred six patients were compared for age, sex, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, Injury Severity Score, abdominal Abbreviated Injury Scale score, and the presence of concomitant injuries. There was no difference in management or outcome of the victims of penetrating injury between G1 and G2 (n = 48). The blunt injury patients in G1 (n = 22) had more liver surgery (p = 0.006), blood transfusion (p = 0.040), intra-abdominal sepsis (6 vs. 0), and higher mortality (p = 0.041) than those in G2 (n = 36). CONCLUSION Isolated severe blunt liver injury may be managed nonoperatively with better survival and less blood products use.

Should patients with isolated hip fractures be included in trauma registries

BACKGROUND Patients with isolated hip fractures are frequently excluded from trauma registries. The goal of this study was to show that patients with these injuries have higher resource use and poorer outcomes than the rest of the trauma population. METHODS The Quebec Trauma Registry was used to identify all trauma patients from April 1, 1998, to March 31, 2003. Patients who were dead on arrival at the emergency room were excluded. Isolated hip fracture (HIP) was defined as a diagnosis of a single fracture to the neck of the femur (Abbreviated Injury Scale 1990 codes 851808.3, 851810.3, 851812.3, and 851818.3) secondary to a fall and for which the Injury Severity Score was 9 or 10 (no other Abbreviated Injury Scale code higher than 1). Patients with all other trauma diagnosis (OT) were used for comparison. Outcome variables were length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, in-hospital complications, and status and orientation at discharge. Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used. RESULTS There were 68,422 patients: 14,426 (21.1%) HIP patients and 53,996 (78.9%) OT patients. The median Injury Severity Score was 9 for HIP (range, 9-10) and 9 for OT (range, 1-75). Mean length of hospital stay was 18.4 days for HIP compared with 11.7 days for OT (p < 0.0001). HIP patients represented 29.5% of the total hospital stay. ICU stay was required for 1,353 HIP patients (9.4%) and for 12,395 (23.0%) OT patients (p < 0.0001). Mean ICU stay was 3.9 days for HIP compared with 5.5 days for OT (p = 0.0006). In-hospital mortality was 8.5% in HIP compared with 3.7% in OT (p < 0.0001). HIP represented 62.7% of patients referred for long-term care and 39.3% of patients referred to a rehabilitation center. CONCLUSION Patients with HIP represented 21.1% of admissions while accounting for 42% of total days of hospitalization and 38% of deaths. Patients with hip fractures have a significantly higher risk of death, prolonged hospital stay, and complication rate, and are more often transferred to a rehabilitation center or to a long-term nursing home than the rest of the trauma population despite lower severity. They require multidisciplinary care typical of the rest of the trauma population and should be included in the trauma registry if the registry is to document the full outcome and resource use of the trauma population.

Implementing a Routine Screening Program in the Acute Care Setting for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

AbstractObjective: The purpose of this study was to show that systematic screening after blunt head trauma can identify patients with previously unsuspected minor closed head injuries which require further treatment. Patients and Methods: All trauma patients reporting to the emergency department of a regional trauma center following blunt trauma, from April 1999 to March 2001, were systematically evaluated for the possibility of a closed head injury whether or not they required admission. Patients with a documented closed head injury, based on clinical or radiologic evaluation or an initial Glasgow Coma Scale < 14 were excluded. A nurse screened patients using a standardized screening tool, a modification of the Rivermead Questionnaire. Positive cases were further evaluated by a team of neuropsychologists using a selected test battery depending on the patients complaints, and extended clinical interview. χ2 was used to compare groups. Results: Among 724 eligible patients with no suspected head injury after blunt trauma, 202 (39%) initially screened positive; 58 refused further investigation. The remaining 144 patients underwent further neuropsychological testing. 120 patients (83%) were tested positive. In the group with positive testing, 48 patients (40%) were referred for rehabilitation on an external basis compared to none in the group with negative testing (p < 0.001). 45 patients (38%) in the group with positive testing and ten patients (42%) in the group with negative testing (p = n.s.) required other treatment such as counseling, psychotherapy or medication. No patients needed neurosurgical consultation. Conclusion: We believe that this study showed the potential utility of systematic screening of blunt head trauma victims. This approach helps to identify a significant number of patients with previously unsuspected minor head injuries who require further treatment.

PAYING THE PRICE OF EXCLUDING PATIENTS FROM A TRAUMA REGISTRY IN A TRAUMA CENTER

BACKGROUND The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of different trauma registry exclusion criteria on the assessment of trauma populations and outcome. METHODS All patients admitted to a Canadian regional trauma center from April 1, 1993 to March 31, 2002 with a diagnosis of trauma (ICD-9 codes 800 to 959) were reviewed. TOTAL included everyone. REGISTRY included only patients meeting any of four criteria: death during hospital stay, transfer received from another hospital, admission to the intensive care unit, or hospital stay of 3 days or more. NOHIP excluded patients with isolated hip fracture. REG/NOHIP combined both. ISS12 and ISS15 excluded patients with ISS <12 and 15, respectively. RESULTS There were 6,839 trauma patients. The percentage of excluded patients by group was: REGISTRY, 21.2%; NOHIP, 14.7%; REG/NOHIP, 34.9%; ISS12, 75%; and ISS15, 80.3%. Median length of stay was 7 days. Exclusions represented a total number of hospitalization days varying from 1.9% to 65.5% of TOTAL. Mortality was 6.9% for TOTAL, 8.6% for REGISTRY (p < 0.001), 5.7% for NOHIP (p = 0.009), 7.5% for REG/NOHIP (p=NS), 16.1% for ISS12 (p < 0.001), and 20.4% for ISS15 (p < 0.001). In groups with exclusions, transfer to long-term care varied from 0.14% to 23.5% in the excluded patients. For rehabilitation, these percentages varied from 0.14% to 17.6%. CONCLUSIONS Registry exclusion criteria significantly alter the apparent severity of injury and resource utilization. The use of divergent exclusion criteria in the analysis of trauma registry data may be misleading.