Ewen Wang

Factors Associated With Trauma Center Use for Elderly Patients With Trauma: A Statewide Analysis, 1999–2008

OBJECTIVES To estimate the likelihood of trauma center admission for injured elderly patients with trauma, determine trends in trauma center admissions, and identify factors associated with trauma center use for elderly patients with trauma. DESIGN Retrospective analysis. SETTING Acute care hospitals in California. PATIENTS All patients hospitalized for acute traumatic injuries during the period from January 1, 1999, to December 31, 2008 (n = 430,081). Patients who had scheduled admissions for nonacute or minor trauma were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Likelihood of admission to level I or II trauma center was calculated according to age categories after adjusting for patient and system factors. RESULTS Of 430,081 patients admitted to California acute care hospitals for trauma-related diagnoses, 27% were older than 65 years. After adjusting for demographic, clinical, and system factors, compared with trauma patients aged 18-25 years, the odds of admission to a trauma center decreased with increasing age; patients aged 26-45 years had lower odds (odds ratio [OR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.80) of being admitted to a trauma center for their injuries than did patients 46-65 years of age (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.54-0.60), patients 66-85 years of age (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.30-0.41), and patients older than 85 years (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.25-0.36). Similar patterns were found when stratifying the analysis by trauma type and severity. Living more than 50 miles away from a trauma center (OR, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.01-0.06) and lack of county trauma center (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.09-0.35) were also predictors of not receiving trauma care. CONCLUSION Age and likelihood of admission to a trauma center for injured patients were observed to be inversely proportional after controlling for other factors. System-level factors play a major role in determining which injured patients receive trauma care.

Disparities in trauma center access despite increasing utilization: data from California, 1999 to 2006.

BACKGROUND Although efforts have been made to address disparities in access to trauma care in the past decade, there is little evidence to show if utilization has changed. We use patient-level data to describe the changes in utilization of trauma centers (TCs) in an 8-year period in California. METHODS We analyzed all statewide trauma admissions (n = 752,706) using the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Discharge Patient Discharge Database from the period of 1999 to 2006, and determined the trends in admissions and place of care. RESULTS The proportion of severe injuries admitted increased by 3.6% (p < 0.05), with a concomitant rise in the proportion of patients with trauma to TCs, from 39.3% (95% CI: 39.0%-39.7%) to 49.7% (49.4%-50.0%). Within the severely injured with injury severity scores (ISS) >15, 82.4% were treated in a TC if they resided in a county with a TC, compared with 30.8% of patients who did not live in a county with a TC. After adjustment, patients living greater than 50 miles away from a TC still had a likelihood ratio of 0.11 (p < 0.0001) of receiving care in a TC compared with those less than 10 miles away. Similarly, even severely injured patients not living in a county with a TC had a likelihood ratio of 0.35 (p < 0.0001) of being admitted to a TC compared with those residing in counties with TCs. CONCLUSION Admissions to TCs for all categories of injury severity are increasing. There remains, however, a large disparity in TC care depending on geographical distance and availability of a TC within county.

The Forgotten Trauma Patient: Outcomes for Injured Patients Evaluated by Emergency Medical Services but not Transported to the Hospital

BACKGROUND: Injured patients who are not transported by an ambulance to the hospital are often not included in trauma registries. The outcomes of these patients have until now been unknown. Understanding what happens to nontransports is necessary to better understand triage validity, patient outcomes, and costs associated with injury. We hypothesized that a subset of patients who were not transported from the scene would later present for evaluation and that these patients would have a nonzero mortality rate. METHODS: This is a population-based, retrospective cohort study of injured adults and children for three counties in California from 2006 to 2008. Prehospital data for injured patients for whom an ambulance was dispatched were probabilistically linked to trauma registry data from four trauma centers, state-level discharge data, emergency department records, and death files (1-year mortality). RESULTS: A total of 69,413 injured persons who were evaluated at the scene by emergency medical services were included in the analysis. Of them, 5,865 (8.5%) were not transported. Of those not transported, 1,616 (28%) were later seen in an emergency department and discharged and 92 (2%) were admitted. Seven (0.2%) patients later died. CONCLUSION: Patients evaluated by emergency medical services, but not initially transported from the field after injury, often present later to the hospital. The mortality rate in this population was not zero, and these patients may represent preventable deaths. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, therapeutic study.