Jeffrey S. Augenstein

100 Multivisceral Transplants at a Single Center

Objective:The objective of this study was to summarize the evolution of multivisceral transplantation over a decade of experience and evaluate its current status. Summary Background Data:Multivisceral transplantation can be valuable for the treatment of patients with massive abdominal catastrophes. Its major limitations have been technical and rejection of the intestinal graft. Methods:This study consisted of an outcome analysis of 98 consecutive patients who received multivisceral transplantation at our institution. This represents the largest single center experience to date. Results:The most common diseases in our population before transplant were intestinal gastroschisis and intestinal dysmotility syndromes in children, and mesenteric thrombosis and trauma in adults. Kaplan Meier estimated patient and graft survivals for all cases were 65% and 63% at 1 year, 49% and 47% at 3 years, and 49% and 47% at 5 years. Factors that adversely influenced patient survival included transplant before 1998 (P = 0.01), being hospitalized at the time of transplant (P = 0.05), and being a child who received Campath-1H induction (P = 0.03). Among 37 patients who had none of these 3 factors (15 adults and 22 children), estimated 1- and 3-year survivals were 89% and 71%, respectively. Patients transplanted since 2001 had significantly less moderate and severe rejections (31.6% vs 67.6%, P = 0.0005) with almost half of these patients never developing rejection. Conclusions:Multivisceral transplantation is now an effective treatment of patients with complex abdominal pathology. The incidences of serious acute rejection and patient survival have improved in the most recent experience. Our results show that the multivisceral graft seems to facilitate engraftment of transplanted organs and raises the possibility that there is a degree of immunologic protection afforded by this procedure.

Measuring team performance in simulation-based training: Adopting best practices for healthcare

Team performance measurement is a critical and frequently overlooked component of an effective simulation-based training system designed to build teamwork competencies. Quality team performance measurement is essential for systematically diagnosing team performance and subsequently making decisions concerning feedback and remediation. However, the complexities of team performance pose a challenge to effectively measuring team performance. This article synthesizes the scientific literature on this topic and provides a set of best practices for designing and implementing team performance measurement systems in simulation-based training.

Debriefing Medical Teams: 12 Evidence-Based Best Practices and Tips

BACKGROUND Medical teams are commonly called on to perform complex tasks, and when those tasks involve saving the lives of critically injured patients, it is imperative that teams perform optimally. Yet, medical care settings do not always lend themselves to efficient teamwork. The human factors and occupational sciences literatures concerning the optimization of team performance suggest the usefulness of a debriefing process--either for critical incidents or recurring events. Although the debrief meeting is often used in the context of training medical teams, it is also useful as a continuous learning tool throughout the life of the team. WHAT ARE GOOD DEBRIEFS? AN OVERVIEW The debriefing process allows individuals to discuss individual and team-level performance, identify errors made, and develop a plan to improve their next performance. BEST PRACTICES AND TIPS FOR DEBRIEFING TEAMS THE DEBRIEF PROCESS: The list of 12 best practices and tips--4 for hospital leaders and the remainder for debrief facilitators or team leaders--should be useful for teams performing in various high-risk areas, including operating rooms, intensive care units, and emergency departments. The best practices and tips should help teams to identify weak areas of teamwork and develop new strategies to improve teamwork competencies. Moreover, they include practices that support both regular, recurring debriefs and critical-incident debriefings. Team members should follow these main guidelines--also provided in checklist form--which include ensuring that the organization creates a supportive learning environment for debriefs (concentrating on a few critical performance issues), providing feedback to all team members, and recording conclusions made and goals set during the debrief to facilitate future feedback.

The Anatomy of Health Care Team Training and the State of Practice: A Critical Review

Purpose As the U.S. health care system enters a new era, the importance of team-based care approaches grows. How is the health care community ensuring that providers and administrators are equipped with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSAs) foundational for effective teamwork? Are these KSAs transferring into daily practice? This review summarizes the present state of practice for health care team training described in published literature. Drawing from empirical investigations of training effectiveness, the authors explore training design, implementation, and evaluation to provide insight into the shape, structure, and anatomy of team training in health care. Method A 2009 literature search yielded 40 peer-reviewed articles detailing health care team training evaluations. Guided by 11 focal questions, two trained raters extracted details regarding training design, implementation, evaluation metrics, and outcomes. Results Findings indicate that team training is being implemented across a wide spectrum of providers and is primarily targeting communication, situational awareness, leadership, and role clarity. Relatively few details indicate how training needs were established. Most studies collected data immediately posttraining; however, less than 30% collected data six months or more posttraining. Content analyses highlight the need for enhanced detail in published training evaluation reports. Conclusions In many respects, health care team training implementation and evaluation align with best practices suggested from the science of training, adult learning, and human performance; however, opportunities for improvement exist. The authors suggest several mechanisms for furthering the health care team training evidence base to enhance patient safety and work environment quality for clinicians.

Occult abdominal injuries to airbag-protected crash victims: a challenge to trauma systems.

A multidisciplinary, automobile crash investigation team at the University of Miami School of Medicine, William Lehman Injury Research Center of Jackson Memorial Hospital/Ryder Trauma Center in Miami, Florida, is conducting a detailed medical and engineering study. The focus is restrained (seatbelts, airbag, or both) occupants involved in frontal crashes who have been severely injured. More than 60 crashes have been included in the study to date. Analysis of the initial data supports the general conclusion that restraint systems are working to reduce many of the head and chest injuries suffered by unrestrained occupants. However, abdominal injuries among airbag-protected occupants still occur. Some are found among occupants who appeared uninjured at the scene. Case examples are provided to illustrate abdominal injuries associated with airbag-protected crashes. The challenges of recognizing injuries to airbag-protected occupants are discussed. To assist in recognizing the extent of injuries to occupants protected by airbags, it is suggested that evidence from the crash scene be used in the triage decision. For the abdominal injury cases observed in this study, deformation of the steering system was the vehicle characteristic most frequently observed. The presence of steering wheel deformation is an indicator of increased likelihood of internal injury. This may justify transporting the victim to a trauma center for a closer examination for abdominal injuries.

Identification of trauma patients at risk of thoracic aortic tear by mechanism of injury.

OBJECTIVE We sought to identify potential measurable on-scene information that would assist clinicians in the identification of patients at risk for thoracic aortic tear (AT) after vehicular trauma. METHODS Data were prospectively collected at the scene of 295 motor vehicle crashes from 1995 to 1999. There were 34 cases (12%) with AT. Scene data consisted of vehicle maximal crush, maximal intrusion into the occupant compartment, change in velocity (Delta V) and principal direction of force. Thoracic aortic injuries were confirmed radiographically or at autopsy. Crash factors were analyzed for correlation with AT by logistic regression. RESULTS Delta V > or = 20 mph and near-side impact were the factors having the strongest correlation with thoracic aortic injury. Delta V > or = 20 mph (n = 32 with AT) had an odds ratio = 6.4, (p < 0.01). Near impact (n = 20 with AT) had an odds ratio = 2.3, (p < 0.05) and intrusion > or = 15 inches had an odds ratio = 3.2, p < 0.05. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the presence of near impact, Delta V > or = 20 mph, or both, were 100%, 34%, and 64%. The positive and negative predictive values were 16% and 100%, respectively. There was no relationship of AT to use of seat belts or airbags. CONCLUSION Thoracic aortic injury after vehicular collision can be reliably excluded if near-impact, Delta V > or = 20 mph, or intrusion > or = 15 inches are not present. Mechanism of injury in the form of crash scene information may aid clinicians in identifying individuals at risk for thoracic aortic tear after vehicular trauma.

Enhancing Patient Safety in the Trauma/surgical Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND Preventable deaths due to errors in trauma patients with otherwise survivable injuries account for up to 10% of fatalities in Level I trauma centers, 50% of these errors occur in the intensive care unit (ICU). The root cause of 67% of the Joint Commission sentinel events is communication errors. The objective is (1) to study how critical information degrades and how it is lost over 24 hours and (2) to determine whether a structured checklist for ICU handoffs prevents information loss. METHODS Prospective cohort study of trauma and surgical ICU teams observed with and without use of the checklist. An observational period (control group) was followed by a didactic session on the science and use of a checklist (study group), which was used for patient management and handoffs. Information was tracked for a 24-hour period and all handoffs. Comparisons use chi or Fishers exact test and a p value <0.05 was defined as significant. RESULTS Three hundred and thirty-two patient ICU days were observed (119 control, 213 study) and 689 patient care items (303 control, 386 study) were followed. Seventy-five (10.9%) items were lost over 24 hours; 61 of 303 (20.1%) without checklist and 14 of 386 (3.6%) with checklist (p < 0.0001). Critical laboratory values and test results were the most frequent lost items (36.1% control vs. 4.5% study p < 0.0001). Six of 75 (8.1%) items were correctly ordered but not carried out by ICU nursing staff--all caught and corrected with checklist use. CONCLUSION Critical information is degraded over 24 hours in the ICU. A structured checklist significantly reduces patient errors due to lost information and communication lapses between trauma ICU team members at handoffs of care.

Prospective randomized trial of two wound management strategies for dirty abdominal wounds

ObjectiveTo determine the optimal method of wound closure for dirty abdominal wounds. Summary Background DataThe rate of wound infection for dirty abdominal wounds is approximately 40%, but the optimal method of wound closure remains controversial. Three randomized studies comparing delayed primary closure (DPC) with primary closure (PC) have not conclusively shown any advantage of one method over the other in terms of wound infection. MethodsFifty-one patients with dirty abdominal wounds related to perforated appendicitis, other perforated viscus, traumatic injuries more than 4 hours old, or intraabdominal abscesses were enrolled. Patients were stratified by cause (appendicitis vs. all other causes) and prospectively randomized to one of two wound management strategies: E/DPC (wound packed with saline-soaked gauze, evaluated 3 days after surgery for closure the next day if appropriate) or PC. In the E/DPC group, wounds that were not pristine when examined on postoperative day 3 were not closed and daily dressing changes were instituted. Wounds were considered infected if purulence discharged from the wound, or possibly infected if signs of inflammation or a serous discharge developed. ResultsTwo patients were withdrawn because they died less than 72 hours after surgery. The wound infection rate was greater in the PC group than in the E/DPC group. Lengths of hospital stay and hospital charges were similar between the two groups. ConclusionA strategy of DPC for appropriate dirty abdominal wounds 4 days after surgery produced a decreased wound infection rate compared with PC without increasing the length of stay or cost.

Pilot evaluation of hypnotic medication during acute traumatic stress response

Early intervention aimed at secondary prevention is a high priority for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) research. Disrupted sleep may have a role in the initiation and maintenance of PTSD. Three of the participants were recruited from a surgical trauma service, and one had sought treatment in a psychiatric setting. All were within 1-3 weeks of trauma exposure and had acute PTSD symptoms that included disturbed sleep. Temazepam, a benzodiazepine hypnotic, was administered for 5 nights, tapered for 2 nights, and then discontinued. Evaluations 1-week after the medication had been discontinued revealed improved sleep and reduced PTSD severity. These observations suggest an approach that may be clinically useful and a need for more systematic trials.

Personal watercraft crash injuries: an emerging problem

BACKGROUND The increased popularity of personal watercraft (PWC) has resulted in an increase in PWC-related injuries. In an effort to better understand the problem, a retrospective review of 37 victims of such injuries seen at a Level I trauma center and fatalities examined by the medical examiner were analyzed. RESULTS Fourteen percent of the victims were passengers, two of whom were struck from behind, resulting in severe injuries. Twelve patients died of their injuries. For six victims, the cause of death was drowning; only one of these victims was wearing a personal flotation device. Two patients sustained transected aortas, 20% had brain injuries, 20% had spinal fractures, and 48% had skeletal and skull fractures. Abdominal organ injuries were present in only 13.5% of the victims, but they were significant, with liver, spleen, and kidney lacerations and aortic and renal artery injuries. CONCLUSION In this population of victims of PWC crashes meeting preestablished trauma criteria or on-scene deaths, injuries were significant. Many of the drowning deaths may have been prevented with the use of personal flotation devices. The potential for serious intra-abdominal injury must be recognized and dealt with appropriately.