Tuomas Brinck

Validation of the revised injury severity classification score in patients with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury

INTRODUCTION By analysing risk-adjusted mortality ratios, weaknesses in the process of care might be identified. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the main cause of death in trauma, and thus it is crucial that trauma prediction models are valid for TBI patients. Accordingly, we assessed the validity of the RISC score in TBI patients by internal and external validation analyses. METHODS Patients with moderate-to-severe TBI admitted to the TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU) and the trauma registry of Helsinki University Hospital (TR-THEL) in 2006-2011 were included in this retrospective open cohort study. Definition of moderate-to-severe TBI was head abbreviated injury scale of 3 or higher. Subgroup analysis for patients with isolated and polytrauma TBI was performed. The performance of the RISC score was evaluated by assessing its discrimination (area under the curve, AUC) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow [H-L] test). RESULTS Among the 9106 and 809 patients with moderate-to-severe TBI admitted to TR-DGU and TR-THEL, unadjusted mortality was 26% and 23%, respectively. Internal and external validation of the RISC score showed good discrimination (TR-DGU AUC 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.90 and TR-THEL AUC 0.84, 95% CI 0.81-0.87), but poor calibration (p<0.001) in patients with moderate-to-severe TBI. Subgroup analysis found the discrimination only to be modest in isolated TBI (AUC 0.76) and calibration to be particularly poor in polytrauma TBI (TR-DGU H-L=4356, p<0.001; TR-THEL H-L 112, p<0.001). CONCLUSION The RISC score was found to be of limited predictive value in patients with moderate-to-severe TBI. A new general trauma scoring system that includes TBI specific prognostic factors is warranted.

The Effect of Evolving Fluid Resuscitation on the Outcome of Severely Injured Patients: An 8-year Experience at a Tertiary Trauma Center

Background and Aims: Fluid resuscitation of severely injured patients has shifted over the last decade toward less crystalloids and more blood products. Helsinki University trauma center implemented the massive transfusion protocol in the end of 2009. The aim of the study was to review the changes in fluid resuscitation and its influence on outcome of severely injured patients with hemodynamic compromise treated at the single tertiary trauma center. Material and Methods: Data on severely injured patients (New Injury Severity Score > 15) from Helsinki University Hospital trauma center’s trauma registry was reviewed over 2006–2013. The isolated head-injury patients, patients without hemodynamic compromise on admission (systolic blood pressure > 90 or base excess > –5.0), and those transferred in from another hospital were excluded. The primary outcome measure was 30-day in-hospital mortality. The study period was divided into three phases: 2006–2008 (pre-protocol, 146 patients), 2009–2010 (the implementation of massive transfusion protocol, 85 patients), and 2011–2013 (post massive transfusion protocol, 121 patients). Expected mortality was calculated using the Revised Injury Severity Classification score II. The Standardized Mortality Ratio, as well as the amounts of crystalloids, colloids, and blood products (red blood cells, fresh frozen plasma, platelets) administered prehospital and in the emergency room were compared. Results: Of the 354 patients that were included, Standardized Mortality Ratio values decreased (indicating better survival) during the study period from 0.97 (pre-protocol), 0.87 (the implementation of massive transfusion protocol), to 0.79 (post massive transfusion protocol). The amount of crystalloids used in the emergency room decreased from 3870 mL (pre-protocol), 2390 mL (the implementation of massive transfusion protocol), to 2340 mL (post massive transfusion protocol). In these patients, the blood products’ (red blood cells, fresh frozen plasma, and platelets together) relation to crystalloids increased from 0.36, 0.70, to 0.74, respectively, in three phases. Conclusion: During the study period, no other major changes in the protocols on treatment of severely injured patients were implemented. The overall awareness of damage control fluid resuscitation and introduction of massive transfusion protocol in a trauma center has a significant positive effect on the outcome of severely injured patients.

External validation of the Norwegian survival prediction model in trauma after major trauma in Southern Finland

The Norwegian Survival Prediction Model in Trauma (NORMIT) is a newly developed outcome prediction model for patients with trauma. We aimed to compare the novel NORMIT to the more commonly used Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) in Finnish trauma patients.

Accuracy and Coverage of Diagnosis and Procedural Coding of Severely Injured Patients in the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register: Comparison to Patient Files and the Helsinki Trauma Registry

Background and Aims: The Finnish Hospital Discharge Register data are frequently used for research purposes. The Finnish Hospital Discharge Register has shown excellent validity in single injuries or disease groups, but no studies have assessed patients with multiple trauma diagnoses. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy and coverage of the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register but at the same time validate the data of the trauma registry of the Helsinki University Hospital’s Trauma Unit. Materials and Methods: We assessed the accuracy and coverage of the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register data by comparing them to the original patient files and trauma registry files from the trauma registry of the Helsinki University Hospital’s Trauma Unit. We identified a baseline cohort of patients with severe thorax injury from the trauma registry of the Helsinki University Hospital’s Trauma Unit of 2013 (sample of 107 patients). We hypothesized that the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register would lack valuable information about these patients. Results: Using patient files, we identified 965 trauma diagnoses in these 107 patients. From the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register, we identified 632 (65.5%) diagnoses and from the trauma registry of the Helsinki University Hospital’s Trauma Unit, 924 (95.8%) diagnoses. A total of 170 (17.6%) trauma diagnoses were missing from the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register data and 41 (4.2%) from the trauma registry of the Helsinki University Hospital’s Trauma Unit data. The coverage and accuracy of diagnoses in the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register were 65.5% (95% confidence interval: 62.5%–68.5%) and 73.8% (95% confidence interval: 70.4%–77.2%), respectively, and for the trauma registry of the Helsinki University Hospital’s Trauma Unit, 95.8% (95% confidence interval: 94.5%–97.0%) and 97.6% (95% confidence interval: 96.7%–98.6%), respectively. According to patient records, these patients were subjects in 249 operations. We identified 40 (16.1%) missing operation codes from the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register and 19 (7.6%) from the trauma registry of the Helsinki University Hospital’s Trauma Unit. Conclusion: The validity of the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register data is unsatisfactory in terms of the accuracy and coverage of diagnoses in patients with multiple trauma diagnoses. Procedural codes provide greater accuracy. We found the coverage and accuracy of the trauma registry of the Helsinki University Hospital’s Trauma Unit to be excellent. Therefore, a special trauma registry, such as the trauma registry of the Helsinki University Hospital’s Trauma Unit, provides much more accurate data and should be the preferred registry when extracting data for research or for administrative use, such as resource prioritizing.

Recommendation of use of checklists in tibial intramedullary nail removal: Retrospective study of mechanical complications related to nail removal

BACKGROUND The removal of implants such as intramedullary nails is one of the most common operations in orthopedic surgery. The indications for orthopedic implants removal will always remain a subject of conversation and hardly supported by literature. The aim of this study to report injuries of treatment in tibial nail removal and to determine if there are fracture characteristics, patient demographics, or surgical details that may predict a complication. METHODS This is a retrospective seven-year (2010-2016) study including a total of 389 tibial intramedullary nail removals at the Helsinki University Hospitals orthopedic unit. Patients with tibial fracture and removal of intramedullary nail were identified from the hospital discharge register and analyzed. RESULTS A total of 21 (5,4%) nail removal related mechanical complications (iatrogenic fractures, nerve injuries, failures to remove the nail) were noted. The most common complication was iatrogenic fracture (n = 15, 3,8%). In 6/15 cases the fracture was caused by broken interlocking screws, In 5/15 cases the iatrogenic fracture was caused accidentally by extracting the nail without prior removal of all distal interlocking screws. In one case, new condensed bone had formed around the nails distal end and case the forced nail extraction caused a re-fracture in both tibia and fibula. CONCLUSION Nail removal can be a challenging operation which does not always receive the necessary preoperative planning or operative expertise. Iatrogenic fractures were most often caused by inadequate preoperative planning or assuming that a broken interlocking screw tilts during the extraction. We suggest the use of checklists in preoperative planning to avoid fractures caused by broken or undetected interlocking screws.

Resource use and clinical outcomes in blunt thoracic injury: a 10-year trauma registry comparison between southern Finland and Germany

PurposeSerious thoracic injuries are associated with high mortality, morbidity, and costs. We compared patient populations, treatment, and survival of serious thoracic injuries in southern Finland and Germany.MethodsMortality, patient characteristics and treatment modalities were compared over time (2006–2015) in all patients with Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) thorax ≥ 3, Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15, age > 15 years, blunt trauma mechanism, and treatment in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in Level 1 hospitals included in the Helsinki Trauma Registry (HTR) and the TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU).ResultsWe included 934 patients from HTR and 25 448 patients from TR-DGU. Pre-hospital differences were seen between HTR and TR-DGU; transportation in the presence of a physician in 61% vs. 97%, helicopter use in 2% vs. 42%, intubation in 31% vs. 55%, and thoracostomy in 6% vs. 10% of cases, respectively. The mean hospital length of stay (LOS) and ICU LOS was shorter in HTR vs. TR-DGU (13 vs. 25 days and 9 vs. 12 days, respectively). Our main outcome measure, standardised mortality ratio, was not statistically significantly different [1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84–1.18; HTR and 0.97, 95% CI 0.94–1.00; TR-DGU].ConclusionsMajor differences were seen in pre-hospital resources and use of pre-hospital intubation and thoracostomy. In Germany, pre-hospital intubation, tube thoracostomy, and on-scene physicians were more prevalent, while patients stayed longer in ICU and in hospital compared to Finland. Despite these differences in resources and treatment modalities, the standardised mortality of these patients was not statistically different.