Karen J. Brasel

Advanced trauma life support, 8th edition, the evidence for change.

The American College of Surgeons Committee on Traumas Advanced Trauma Life Support Course is currently taught in 50 countries. The 8th edition has been revised following broad input by the International ATLS subcommittee. Graded levels of evidence were used to evaluate and approve changes to the course content. New materials related to principles of disaster management have been added. ATLS is a common language teaching one safe way of initial trauma assessment and management.

Injury in the aged: geriatric trauma care at the crossroads

In the 2010 US Census, the number of persons age 65 years and older constituted 13% of the population and is projected to constitute 22% of the population by 2020.1 As the US population ages, there is an increasing volume of GTPs; injury is now the seventh leading cause of death for those age 65 years.2 Geriatric trauma is increasing both in absolute number and as a proportion of annual volume presenting to trauma centers. Based on the National Trauma Data Bank, the proportion of trauma patients aged 65 years or older in Level I and II trauma centers increased from 23% in 2003 to 30% in 2009. This is likely a significant underestimate because most GTPs are treated at lower-level or nontrauma centers.3,4 In Washington State, for example, the annual number of GTPs in the state registry has increased from 4,266 in 2000 to 11,226 in 2012, an increase from 30% to 42% of the total trauma population. Clearly, the management of injury in geriatric patients will continue to be a major challenge for trauma care providers. In his presidential address to the AAST entitled “For the care of the undeserved,” Dr. Robert Mackersie identified the growing population of elderly injured patients as medically underserved in terms of limited trauma center access, age-related treatment biases, and as a result, deprived of many of the recent advances in modern trauma care.5 To specifically address these inequalities, he convened an Ad Hoc Geriatric Committee and charged it, “To advise the AAST regarding the problems, issues, and needs of the geriatric patient.” What follows is the work product of the Committee in responding to President Mackersie’s charge. The initial priority was to survey the membership of the AAST to better understand the current conditions under which hospitalized GTPs are receiving care. The second task of the Committee was to enumerate the major problems associated with the care of GTPs and to suggest potential solutions to the identified problems. While the Committee does not presume infallibility in its pronouncements, the material presented is intended to initiate discussion, stimulate research, and to ultimately result in evidence-based guidelines that will better serve this “underserved” segment of our population.

Integrating Palliative Care into the Care of Neurocritically Ill Patients: A Report from the Improving Palliative Care in the ICU Project Advisory Board and the Center to Advance Palliative Care∗

Objectives:To describe unique features of neurocritical illness that are relevant to provision of high-quality palliative care; to discuss key prognostic aids and their limitations for neurocritical illnesses; to review challenges and strategies for establishing realistic goals of care for patients in the neuro-ICU; and to describe elements of best practice concerning symptom management, limitation of life support, and organ donation for the neurocritically ill. Data Sources:A search of PubMed and MEDLINE was conducted from inception through January 2015 for all English-language articles using the term “palliative care,” “supportive care,” “end-of-life care,” “withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy,” “limitation of life support,” “prognosis,” or “goals of care” together with “neurocritical care,” “neurointensive care,” “neurological,” “stroke,” “subarachnoid hemorrhage,” “intracerebral hemorrhage,” or “brain injury.” Data Extraction and Synthesis:We reviewed the existing literature on delivery of palliative care in the neurointensive care unit setting, focusing on challenges and strategies for establishing realistic and appropriate goals of care, symptom management, organ donation, and other considerations related to use and limitation of life-sustaining therapies for neurocritically ill patients. Based on review of these articles and the experiences of our interdisciplinary/interprofessional expert advisory board, this report was prepared to guide critical care staff, palliative care specialists, and others who practice in this setting. Conclusions:Most neurocritically ill patients and their families face the sudden onset of devastating cognitive and functional changes that challenge clinicians to provide patient-centered palliative care within a complex and often uncertain prognostic environment. Application of palliative care principles concerning symptom relief, goal setting, and family emotional support will provide clinicians a framework to address decision making at a time of crisis that enhances patient/family autonomy and clinician professionalism.

“Best Case/Worst Case”: Qualitative Evaluation of a Novel Communication Tool for Difficult in‐the‐Moment Surgical Decisions

To evaluate a communication tool called “Best Case/Worst Case” (BC/WC) based on an established conceptual model of shared decision‐making.

Multicenter External Validation of the Geriatric Trauma Outcome Score: A Study by the Prognostic Assessment of Life and Limitations After Trauma in the Elderly [PALLIATE] Consortium

BACKGROUND A prognostic tool for geriatric mortality after injury called the Geriatric Trauma Outcome Score (GTOS), where GTOS = [age] + [ISS × 2.5] + [22 if transfused any PRBCs by 24 hours after admission], was previously developed based on 13 years of data from geriatric trauma patients admitted to Parkland Hospital. We sought to validate this model. METHODS Four Level I centers identified subjects who are 65 years or older for the period of the original study. The GTOS model was first specified using the formula [GTOS = age + (ISS × 2.5) + 22 (if given PRBC by 24 hours)] developed from the Parkland sample and then used as the sole predictor in a logistic mixed model estimating probability of mortality in the validation sample, accounting for site as a random effect. We estimated the misclassification (error) rate, Brier score, Tjur R2, and the area under the curve in evaluating the predictive performance of the GTOS model. RESULTS The original Parkland sample (n = 3,841) had a mean (SD) age of 76.6 (8.1) years, mean (SD) ISS of 12.4 (9.9), mortality of 10.8%, and 11.9% receiving PRBCs at 24 hours. The validation sample (n = 18,282) had a mean (SD) age of 77.0 (8.1) years, mean (SD) ISS of 12.3 (10.6), mortality of 11.0%, and 14.1% receiving PRBCs at 24 hours. Fitting the GTOS model to the validation sample revealed that the parameter estimates from the validation sample were similar to those of fitting it to the Parkland sample with highly overlapping 95% confidence limits. The misclassification (error) rate for the GTOS logistic model applied to the validation sample was 9.97%, similar to that of the Parkland sample (9.79%). Brier score, Tjur R2, and the area under the curve for the GTOS logistic model when applied to the validation sample were 0.07, 0.25, and 0.86, respectively, compared with 0.08, 0.20, and 0.82, respectively, for the Parkland sample. CONCLUSION With the use of the data available at 24 hours after injury, the GTOS accurately predicts in-hospital mortality for the injured elderly. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Prognostic study, level III.

A framework to improve surgeon communication in high-stakes surgical decisions best case/worst case

Importance Although many older adults prefer to avoid burdensome interventions with limited ability to preserve their functional status, aggressive treatments, including surgery, are common near the end of life. Shared decision making is critical to achieve value-concordant treatment decisions and minimize unwanted care. However, communication in the acute inpatient setting is challenging. Objective To evaluate the proof of concept of an intervention to teach surgeons to use the Best Case/Worst Case framework as a strategy to change surgeon communication and promote shared decision making during high-stakes surgical decisions. Design, Setting, and Participants Our prospective pre-post study was conducted from June 2014 to August 2015, and data were analyzed using a mixed methods approach. The data were drawn from decision-making conversations between 32 older inpatients with an acute nonemergent surgical problem, 30 family members, and 25 surgeons at 1 tertiary care hospital in Madison, Wisconsin. Interventions A 2-hour training session to teach each study-enrolled surgeon to use the Best Case/Worst Case communication framework. Main Outcomes and Measures We scored conversation transcripts using OPTION 5, an observer measure of shared decision making, and used qualitative content analysis to characterize patterns in conversation structure, description of outcomes, and deliberation over treatment alternatives. Results The study participants were patients aged 68 to 95 years (n = 32), 44% of whom had 5 or more comorbid conditions; family members of patients (n = 30); and surgeons (n = 17). The median OPTION 5 score improved from 41 preintervention (interquartile range, 26-66) to 74 after Best Case/Worst Case training (interquartile range, 60-81). Before training, surgeons described the patient’s problem in conjunction with an operative solution, directed deliberation over options, listed discrete procedural risks, and did not integrate preferences into a treatment recommendation. After training, surgeons using Best Case/Worst Case clearly presented a choice between treatments, described a range of postoperative trajectories including functional decline, and involved patients and families in deliberation. Conclusions and Relevance Using the Best Case/Worst Case framework changed surgeon communication by shifting the focus of decision-making conversations from an isolated surgical problem to a discussion about treatment alternatives and outcomes. This intervention can help surgeons structure challenging conversations to promote shared decision making in the acute setting.

Western Trauma Association Critical Decisions in Trauma: Diagnosis and management of esophageal injuries

This is a recommended management algorithm from the Western Trauma Association addressing the diagnostic evaluation and management of esophageal injuries in adult patients. Because there is a paucity of published prospective randomized clinical trials that have generated Class I data, the recommendations herein are based primarily on published observational studies and expert opinion of Western Trauma Association members. The algorithms and accompanying comments represent a safe and sensible approach that can be followed at most trauma centers. We recognize that there will be patient, personnel, institutional, and situational factors that may warrant or require deviation from the recommended algorithm. We encourage institutions to use this guideline to formulate their own local protocols.The algorithm contains letters at decision points; the corresponding paragraphs in the text elaborate on the thought process and cite pertinent literature. The annotated algorithm is intended to (a) serve as a quick bedside reference for clinicians; (b) foster more detailed patient care protocols that will allow for prospective data collection and analysis to identify best practices; and (c) generate research projects to answer specific questions concerning decision making in the management of adults with esophageal injuries.

End-of-Life Care of the Geriatric Surgical Patient

Providing end-of-life care is a necessity for nearly all health care providers and especially those in surgical fields. Most surgical practices will involve caring for geriatric patients and those with life-threatening or terminal illnesses where discussions about end-of-life decision making and goals of care are essential. Understanding the differences between do not resuscitate (DNR), palliative care, hospice care, and symptom management in patients at the end of life is a critical skill set.

Collider Bias in Trauma Comparative Effectiveness Research: The Stratification Blues for Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND Collider bias, or stratifying data by a covariate consequence rather than cause (confounder) of treatment and outcome, plagues randomised and observational trauma research. Of the seven trials of prehospital hypertonic saline in dextran (HSD) that have been evaluated in systematic reviews, none found an overall between-group difference in survival, but four reported significant subgroup effects. We hypothesised that an avoidable type of collider bias often introduced inadvertently into trauma comparative effectiveness research could explain the incongruous findings. METHODS The two most recent HSD trials, a single-site pilot and a multi-site pivotal study, provided data for a secondary analysis to more closely examine the potential for collider bias. The two trials had followed the a priori statistical analysis plan to subgroup patients by a post-randomisation covariate and well-established surrogate for bleeding severity, massive transfusion (MT), ≥ 10 unit of red blood cells within 24h of admission. Despite favourable HSD effects in the MT subgroup, opposite effects in the non-transfused subgroup halted the pivotal trial early. In addition to analyzing the data from the two trials, we constructed causal diagrams and performed a meta-analysis of the results from all seven trials to assess the extent to which collider bias could explain null overall effects with subgroup heterogeneity. RESULTS As in previous trials, HSD induced significantly greater increases in systolic blood pressure (SBP) from prehospital to admission than control crystalloid (p=0.003). Proportionately more HSD than control decedents accrued in the non-transfused subgroup, but with paradoxically longer survival. Despite different study populations and a span of over 20 years across the seven trials, the reported mortality effects were consistently null, summary RR=0.99 (p=0.864, homogeneity p=0.709). CONCLUSIONS HSD delayed blood transfusion by modifying standard triggers like SBP with no detectable effect on survival. The reported heterogeneous HSD effects in subgroups can be explained by collider bias that trauma researchers can avoid by improved covariate selection and data capture strategies.

Management of rib fractures: A Western Trauma Association Critical Decisions algorithm

This is a recommended management algorithm from the Western Trauma Association addressing the management of adult patients with rib fractures. Because there is a paucity of published prospective randomized clinical trials that have generated Class I data, these recommendations are based primarily on published observational studies and expert opinion of Western Trauma Association members. The algorithm and accompanying comments represent a safe and sensible approach that can be followed at most trauma centers. We recognize that there will be patient, personnel, institutional, and situational factors that may warrant or require deviation from the recommended algorithm. We encourage institutions to use this as a guideline to develop their own local protocols.