Elie P. Ramly

Tourniquet use at the Boston Marathon bombing: Lost in translation

BACKGROUND The Boston Marathon bombing was the first major, modern US terrorist event with multiple, severe lower extremity injuries. First responders, including trained professionals and civilian bystanders, rushed to aid the injured. The purpose of this review was to determine how severely bleeding extremity injuries were treated in the prehospital setting in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing. METHODS A database was created and populated by all the Boston Level I trauma centers following the Boston Marathon bombing. Data regarding specific injuries, extremities affected, demographics, prehospital interventions (including tourniquet types), and outcomes were extracted. RESULTS Of 243 injured, 152 patients presented to the emergency department within 24 hours. Of these 152 patients, there were 66 (63.6% female) experiencing at least one extremity injury, with age ranging from younger than 15 years to 71 years, and with a median Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 10 (range, 1–38). Of the 66 injured patients, 4 had upper limbs affected, 56 had injuries on the lower limbs only, and 6 had combined upper and lower limbs affected. The extremity Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) scores had a median of 3 (range, 1–4). There were 17 lower extremity traumatic amputations in 15 patients. In addition, there were 10 patients with 12 lower extremities experiencing major vascular injuries. Of 66 injured patients, 29 patients had recognized extremity exsanguination at the scene. In total, 27 tourniquets were applied: 16 of 17 traumatic amputations, 5 of 12 lower extremities with major vascular injuries, and 6 additional limbs with major soft tissue injury. All tourniquets were improvised, and no commercial, purpose-designed tourniquets were identified. Among all 243 patients, mortality was 0%. CONCLUSION After the Boston Marathon bombings, extremity exsanguination at the point of injury was either left untreated or treated with an improvised tourniquet in the prehospital environment. An effective, prehospital extremity hemorrhage control posture should be translated to all civilian first responders in the United States and should mirror the military’s posture toward extremity bleeding control. The prehospital response to extremity exsanguination after the Boston Marathon bombing demonstrates that our current practice is an approach, lost in translation, from the battlefield to the homeland. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Epidemiologic study, level V.

The Effect of Aging on Pulmonary Function:Implications for Monitoring and Support of the Surgical and Trauma Patient

Age-related anatomic, physiologic, and immunologic changes to the pulmonary system, as well as a high prevalence of chronic pulmonary diseases, puts the geriatric patient at an especially high risk for postoperative pulmonary complications. Successful perioperative respiratory care of the geriatric patient relies on careful risk assessment and optimization of pulmonary function and support. The success of such efforts aimed at preventing and/or mitigating pulmonary complications in the geriatric patient depends on a thorough, individualized, yet standardized and evidence-based approach to the care of every patient.

The state of the union: Nationwide absence of uniform guidelines for the prehospital use of tourniquets to control extremity exsanguination.

BACKGROUND After the Sandy Hook shootings and the resulting Hartford Consensus, as well as the recent Boston Marathon bombing, the need for a uniform, detailed, and aggressive prehospital extremity exsanguination control protocol became clear. We hypothesized that most states within the United States lack a detailed uniform protocol. METHODS We performed a systematic nationwide assessment of emergency medical services (EMS) prehospital extremity exsanguination control protocols. An online search (updated February 7, 2015) identified state-, region-, or county-specific EMS protocols in all 50 states. If unavailable online, protocols were retrieved directly by contacting each states Department of Public Health (or other appropriate agency). Two investigators independently screened each extremity exsanguination control protocol. Protocols were first grouped into three categories: I, tourniquet not mentioned; II, tourniquet mentioned, without specific guidance; III, tourniquet mentioned, with specific guidance related to type, indications, application technique, and safety concerns. Each protocol was then scored on a five-point scale for comparison. RESULTS Forty-two states (84%) had statewide and 14 (28%) had at least one county-specific protocol. Seven states (16%) had no statewide protocol but at least one county-specific protocol (range, 1–10). Mississippi had neither statewide nor county-specific protocols. Of statewide protocols, 4 (9.5%) were in Category I, 23 (54.8%) in Category II, and 15 (35.7%) in Category III. The mean score for statewide tourniquets was 2.4/5 (SD, 1.25; range, 0–5). Thirteen (31%) statewide protocols referred to “commercial” or “approved” tourniquets; only three (7%) recommended a particular commercial device. The mean score for the county-specific protocols of states with no statewide protocol was 3.10 (SD, 1.56; range, 0–5) CONCLUSIONS Throughout the United States, there is considerable variability in EMS protocols addressing the management of extremity exsanguination and an alarming absence of specific guidance for tourniquet use. Most states do not have a uniform, detailed, and aggressive prehospital extremity exsanguination control protocol. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Epidemiologic and prognostic study, level III.

Perioperative risk factors impact outcomes in emergency versus nonemergency surgery differently: Time to separate our national risk-adjustment models?

BACKGROUND Emergency surgery (ES) is acknowledged to be riskier than nonemergency surgery (NES). Yet, little is known about the relative impact of individual perioperative risk factors on 30-day outcomes in ES versus NES. METHODS Using the 2011–2012 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program nationwide database, the 20 most common ES procedures were identified by Current Procedural Terminology code. Current Procedural Terminology codes with less than 300 observations in either ES or NES were excluded. Emergency surgery cases were defined as “emergent” and “nonelective” per American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program criteria. Multivariable regression models were constructed to identify predictors of 30-day major morbidity and mortality (MMM) in each group, controlling for demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, comorbidities, preoperative laboratory values, and procedure type. The odds ratios of independent predictors of MMM in ES and NES were derived then individually compared between the two groups; “effect modification” of procedure status (ES vs. NES) on each risk factor was subsequently calculated. RESULTS Of 986,034 patients, 170,131 met inclusion criteria (59,949 ES; 110,182 NES). The overall risk of MMM was significantly higher in ES versus NES (16.75% vs. 9.73%, p < 0.001; odds ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.12–1.24; p < 0.001). Of 40 ES- and 38 NES-identified independent risk factors, preoperative transfusion and white blood cell count of 4.5 × 103/&mgr;L or less carried significantly higher relative risk of MMM in ES versus NES. Conversely, ascites, preoperative anemia, and white blood cell count of 11 × 103/&mgr;L to 25 × 103/&mgr;L carried greater relative risk for MMM in NES. Four procedures (laparoscopic cholecystectomy, laparotomy, and umbilical and incisional herniorrhaphy) were inherently riskier in ES versus NES. The effect modification of ES (vs. NES) ranged between 0.68 (0.52–0.88) for ascites and 2.56 (1.67–3.92) for umbilical hernia repair. CONCLUSIONS Perioperative risk factors and procedure type impact postoperative morbidity and mortality differently in ES versus NES. Instead of using the same risk-adjustment model for both ES and NES, as currently practiced, our findings strongly suggest the need to benchmark emergent and elective surgeries separately. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Prognostic/epidemiologic study, level III.

Derivation and Validation of a Novel Physiological Emergency Surgery Acuity Score (PESAS)

BackgroundWe present a novel and abbreviated Physiological Emergency Surgery Acuity Score (PESAS) that assesses the severity of disease at presentation in patients undergoing Emergency Surgery (ES).MethodsUsing the 2011 ACS-NSQIP database, we identified all patients who underwent “emergent” surgery. The following methodology was designed: (1) identification of independent predictors of 30-day mortality that are markers of acuity; (2) derivation of PESAS based on the relative impact (i.e., odds ratio) of each predictor; and (3) measurement of the c-statistic. The PESAS was validated using the 2012 ACS-NSQIP database.ResultsFrom 24,702 ES cases, a 15-point score was derived. This included 10 components with a range of 0 and 15 points. Its c-statistic was 0.80. Mortality gradually increased from 1.7 to 40.6 to 100% at scores of 0, 8, and 15, respectively. In the validation phase, PESAS c-statistic remained stable.ConclusionPESAS is a novel score that assesses the acuity of disease at presentation in ES patients and strongly correlates with postoperative mortality risk. PESAS could prove useful for preoperative counseling and for risk-adjusted benchmarking.

Health care utilization and charges following the enactment of the 2007 Graduated Drivers Licensing Law in Massachusetts

BACKGROUND Graduated Drivers Licensing (GDL) programs phase in driving privileges for teenagers. In 2007, Massachusetts implemented a stricter version of the 1998 GDL law, with increased fines and education. This study evaluated the impact of the law on motor vehicle crash (MVC)-related health care utilization and charges. METHODS Massachusetts government and US Census Bureau data were analyzed to compare the rates of MVC-related emergency department (ED) visits and hospital charges before (2002-2006) and after (2007-2011) the 2007 GDL law. Three driver age groups were studied: 16-17 (evaluating the law effect), 18-20 (evaluating the sustainability of the effect), and 25-29 years old (control group). RESULTS MVC-related ED visits per population decreased after the law for all three age groups (16-17: 2326 to 713; 18-20: 2110 to 1304; 25-29: 1694 to 1228; per 100,000, p<0.001), but the decrease was greater amongst teenagers (16-17: -69%; 18-20: -38%) compared to the control group (-27%); p<0.001. MVC-related hospital charges per population also decreased for teenagers but increased for the control group (16-17:

Creation of the first Hartford Consensus compliant elementary school in the USA

2.70 m to

Low baseline (pre-injury) blood pressure predicts inpatient mortality in elderly trauma patients: A bi-institutional study.

1.45 m; 18-20:

The financial impact of intraoperative adverse events in abdominal surgery.

3.52 m to

Intraoperative Adverse Events: Risk Adjustment for Procedure Complexity and Presence of Adhesions Is Crucial

2.26 m; 25-29: