S Horne

UK triage – An improved tool for an evolving threat

INTRODUCTIONnA key challenge at a major incident is to quickly identify those casualties most urgently needing treatment in order to survive - triage. The UK Triage Sieve (TS) advocated by the Major Incident Medical Management (MIMMS) Course categorises casualties by ability to walk, respiratory rate (RR) and heart rate (HR) or capillary refill time. The military version (MS) includes assessment of consciousness. We tested whether the MS better predicts need for life-saving intervention in a military trauma population. Ideal HR, RR and Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) thresholds were calculated.nnnMETHODSnA gold standard Priority 1 casualty was defined using resource-based criteria. Pre-hospital data from a military trauma database allowed calculation of triage category, which was compared with this standard, and presented as 2×2 tables. Sensitivity and specificity of each physiological parameter was calculated over a range of values to identify the ideal cut-offs.nnnRESULTSnA gold standard could be ascribed in 1657 cases. In 1213 both the MS and TS could ascribe a category. MS was significantly more sensitive than TS (59% vs 53%, p<0.001) with similar specificity (89 vs 88%). Varying the limits for each parameter allowed some improvements in sensitivity (70-80%) but specificity dropped rapidly.nnnDISCUSSIONnPrevious studies support the inclusion of GCS assessment for blunt as well as penetrating trauma. Optimising the physiological cut-offs increased sensitivity in this sample to only 71% - a Sieve based purely on physiological parameters may not be capable of an acceptable level of sensitivity.nnnCONCLUSIONSnThe MS is more sensitive than the TS. Major incident planners utilising the Sieve should consider adopting the military version as their first line triage tool. If validated, altering the HR and RR thresholds may further improve the tool.

Usefulness of the Shock Index as a secondary triage tool

Introduction Secondary triage at a major incident allows for a more detailed assessment of the patient. In the UK, the Triage Sort (TSO) is the preferred method, combining GCS, systolic BP (SBP) and RR to categorise Priority 1 casualties. The Shock Index (SI) is calculated by dividing HR by SBP (HR/SBP). This study examines whether SI is better at predicting need for life-saving intervention (LSI) following trauma than TSO. Methods A prospective observational study was undertaken. Physiological data and interventions performed in the Emergency Department and operating theatre were prospectively collected for 482 consecutive adult trauma patients presenting to Camp Bastion, Afghanistan, over a 6-month period. A patient was deemed to have required LSI if they received any intervention from a set described previously. Results Complete data were available for 345 patients (71.6%). Of these, 203 (58.8%) were gold standard P1, and 142 (41.2%) were non-P1. The TSO predicted need for LSI with a sensitivity of 58.6% (95% CI 51.8% to 65.4%) and specificity of 88.7% (95% CI 83.5% to 93.9%). Using an SI cut-off >0.75 provided greater sensitivity of 70.0% (95% CI 63.6% to 76.3%) while maintaining an acceptably high (although lower than TSO) specificity of 74.7% (95% CI 67.5% to 81.8%). At this SI cut-off, there was evidence of a difference between TSO and SI in terms of the way in which patients were triaged (p<0.0001). Discussion Our study showed that a SI >0.75 more accurately predicted the need for LSI, while maintaining acceptable specificity. SI may be more useful than TSO for secondary triage in a mass-casualty situation; this relationship in civilian trauma should be examined to clarify whether these results can be more widely translated into civilian practice. Project registration number RCDM/Res/Audit/1036/12/0050.

The prospective validation of the Modified Physiological Triage Tool (MPTT): an evidence-based approach to major incident triage

Introduction Triage is a key principle in the effective management of major incidents. There is limited evidence to support existing triage tools, with a number of studies demonstrating poor performance at predicting the need for a life-saving intervention. The Modified Physiological Triage Tool (MPTT) is a novel triage tool derived using logistic regression, and in retrospective data sets has shown optimum performance at predicting the need for life-saving intervention. Materials and methods Physiological data and interventions were prospectively collected for consecutive adult patients with trauma (>18 years) presenting to the emergency department at Camp Bastion, Afghanistan, between March and September 2011. Patients were considered priority 1 (P1) if they received one or more interventions from a previously defined list. Patients were triaged using existing triage tools and the MPTT. Performance was measured using sensitivity and specificity, and a McNemar test with Bonferroni calculation was applied for tools with similar performance. Results The study population comprised 357 patients, of whom 214 (59.9%) were classed as P1. The MPTT (sensitivity: 83.6%, 95% CI 78.0% to 88.3%; specificity: 51.0%, 95% CI 42.6% to 59.5%) outperformed all existing triage tools at predicting the need for life-saving intervention, with a 19.6% absolute reduction in undertriage compared with the existing Military Sieve. The improvement in undertriage comes at the expense of overtriage; rates of overtriage were 11.6% higher with the MPTT than the Military Sieve. Using a McNemar test, a statistically significant (p<0.001) improvement in overall performance was demonstrated, supporting the use of the MPTT over the Military Sieve. Discussion and conclusions The MPTT outperforms all existing triage tools at predicting the need for life-saving intervention, with the lowest rates of undertriage while maintaining acceptable levels of overtriage. Having now been validated on both military and civilian cohorts, we recommend that the major incident community consider adopting the MPTT for the purposes of primary triage.

Predictors of massive blood transfusion: a Delphi Study to examine the views of experts

Background Trauma patients requiring massive blood transfusion (MBT) have high morbidity and mortality: early and aggressive use of blood products during immediate resuscitation may improve survival. There is currently a lack of evidence to guide initial identification of these patients which is especially important in areas where plasma may need to be thawed. In the absence of this evidence, this study aimed to robustly evaluate expert opinion by using a Delphi process to identify predictors of massive transfusion. This process can be used to ensure that decision rules include variables that have clinical validity, which may improve translation of rules into clinical practice. Methods An international panel of 35 experts was identified through expert advice against specific criteria. Military and civilian experts from the fields of emergency medicine, critical care, anaesthesia, prehospital care, haematology and general/trauma surgery were included. The Delphi Study was carried out over three rounds. Consensus level was predefined at 80%. Results 195 statements were generated by the panel of which 97 (49.7%) achieved consensus at the 80% level by the end of round 3. Strikingly no clinical observations reached consensus individually. Metabolic acidosis of a base excess of −5.0 or worse, lactate >5u2005mmol/L and a low haematocrit on arrival were all considered predictive. Some patterns of injury, but few mechanisms of injury, were considered highly predictive of the need of MBT. Conclusions This Delphi process has produced a list of parameters that expert clinicians felt were predictive for MBT. This list can be used to inform the generation of decision rules. It is of note that many factors used in current decision rules were not valued by clinical experts—this may be a cause for poor uptake of those rules.

Psoas abscess secondary to haematoma after a fall causing multiple osteoporotic fractures

A 78-year-old woman presented 28u2005days after a low-impact fall, where she sustained a right pubic ramus fracture, with increasing left hip pain and fever. Her blood results showed a high white cell count and deranged urea and electrolytes. An MRI revealed multiple osteoporotic fractures and bilateral gluteal abscesses with left iliopsoas abscess, which had likely formed in a haematoma of a sacral fracture. She received a long course of intravenous antibiotics and CT-guided drainage of the abscesses. She developed symptoms of cauda equina, but no evidence of epidural extension of the abscess was found at operation. She required neurorehabilitation. This case highlights the complications of pelvic osteoporotic fractures, and high associated morbidity and mortality in the elderly population.

An outbreak inside an epidemic: managing an infectious disease outbreak while treating Ebola

Even in the middle of an epidemic of a very serious illness, outbreaks of other infectious diseases will continue. Clinicians need to be able to make rapid decisions about the nature of the outbreak and how to manage it. A balance needs to be struck between managing all patients as if they have the worst-case scenario illness and the resultant risks to themselves, their colleagues and the mission. This paper reviews basic epidemiological tools that inform robust decision-making in the management of such outbreaks. It then describes how a pragmatic approach, combined with effective use of these techniques, rapid diagnostics and remote specialist support, allowed a large outbreak of gastroenteritis to be safely and effectively managed during the response to the Ebola virus disease epidemic in Sierra Leone.

Triage in the Defence Medical Services

Triage of patients into categories according to their need for intervention is a core part of military medical practice. This article reviews how triage has evolved in the Defence Medical Services and how it might develop in the context of recent research. In particular, a simple model demonstrates that the ideal sensitivity and specificity of a triage system depends upon the availability of transport and the capacity of the receiving units. As a result, we may need to fundamentally change the way we approach triage in order to optimise outcomes—especially if casualty evacuation timelines become longer and smaller medical units more prevalent on future operations. Some pragmatic options for change are discussed. Finally, other areas of current research around triage are highlighted, perhaps showing where triage may go next.

Triage and the Modified Physiological Triage Tool-24 (MPTT-24)

Major incidents occur on a regular basis. So far in 2017, England has witnessed five terrorism-related major incidents, resulting in approximately 40 fatalities and 400 injured. Triage is a key principle in the effective management of a major incident and involves prioritising patients on the basis of their clinical acuity. This paper describes the limitations associated with existing methods of primary major incident triage and the process of developing a new and improved triage tool—the Modified Physiological Triage Tool-24 (MPTT-24). Whilst the MPTT-24 is likely to be the optimum physiological method for primary major incident triage, it needs to be accompanied by an appropriate secondary triage process. The existing UK military and civilian secondary triage tool, the Triage Sort, is described, which offers little advantage over primary methods for identifying patients who require life-saving intervention. Further research is required to identify the optimum method of secondary triage.