24 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Attempting to validate the over/under triage matrix at a level I trauma center.
The Optimal Resources Document (ORD) mandates trauma activation based on injury mechanism, physiologic and anatomic criteria and recommends using the over/undertriage matrix (Matrix) to evaluate the appropriateness of trauma team activation. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of the Matrix method by comparing patients appropriately triaged with those undertriaged. We hypothesized that these two groups are different and Matrix does not discriminate the needs or outcomes of these different groups of patients.Trauma registry data, from 1/2013-12/2015, at a Level I trauma center were reviewed. Over and undertriage rates were calculated by Matrix. Patients with ISS ≥16 were classified by activation level (full, limited, consultation), and triage category by Matrix. Patients in the limited activation and consultation groups were compared to patients with full activation by demographics, injuries, initial vital signs, procedures, delays to procedure, ICU admission, length of stay, and mortality.7031 patients met activation criteria. Compliance with ACS tiered activation criteria was 99%. The Matrix overtriage rate was 45% and undertriage was 24%. Of 2282 patients with an ISS ≥16, 1026 were appropriately triaged (full activation), and 1256 were under triaged. Undertriaged patients had better GCS, blood pressure, and BD than patients with full activation. ICU admission, hospital stays, and mortality were lower in the undertriaged group. The under triaged group required fewer operative interventions with fewer delays to procedure.Despite having an ISS ≥ 16, patients with limited activations were dissimilar to patients with full activation. Level of activation and triage are not equivalent. The ACS-COT full and tiered activation criteria are a robust means to have the appropriate personnel present based on available pre-hospital information. Evaluation of the process of care, regardless of level of activation should be used to evaluate trauma center performance.Level III Therapeutic and Care managementThis is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal
Recommended from our members
Current outcomes of blunt open pelvic fractures: how modern advances in trauma care may decrease mortality.
Background:Open pelvic fracture, caused by a blunt mechanism, is an uncommon injury with a high mortality rate. In 2008, evidence-based algorithm for managing pelvic fractures in unstable patients was published by the Western Trauma Association (WTA). The use of massive transfusion protocols has become widespread as has the availability and use of pelvic angiography. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of open pelvic fractures in association with related advances in trauma care. Methods:A retrospective review was performed, at an American College of Surgeon verified level I trauma center, of patients with blunt open pelvic fractures from January 2010 to April 2016. The WTA algorithm, including massive transfusion protocol, and pelvic angiography were uniformly used. Data collected included injury severity score, demographic data, transfusion requirements, use of pelvic angiography, length of stay, and disposition. Data were compared with a similar study from 2005. Results:During the study period, 1505 patients with pelvic fractures were analyzed; 87 (6%) patients had open pelvic fractures. Of these, 25 were from blunt mechanisms and made up the study population. Patients in both studies had similar injury severity scores, ages, Glasgow Coma Scale, and gender distributions. Use of angiography was higher (44% vs. 16%; P=0.011) and mortality was lower (16% vs. 45%; P=0.014) than in the 2005 study. Conclusions:Changes in trauma care for patients with open blunt pelvic fracture include the use of an evidence-based algorithm, massive transfusion protocols and increased use of angioembolization. Mortality for open pelvic fractures has decreased with these advances. Level of evidence:Level IV
Recommended from our members
Attempting to validate the overtriage/undertriage matrix at a Level I trauma center.
BackgroundThe Optimal Resources Document mandates trauma activation based on injury mechanism, physiologic and anatomic criteria and recommends using the overtriage/undertriage matrix (Matrix) to evaluate the appropriateness of trauma team activation. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of the Matrix method by comparing patients appropriately triaged with those undertriaged. We hypothesized that these two groups are different, and Matrix does not discriminate the needs or outcomes of these different groups of patients.MethodsTrauma registry data, from January 2013 to December 2015, at a Level I trauma center, were reviewed. Overtriage and undertriage rates were calculated by Matrix. Patients with Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 16 or greater were classified by activation level (full, limited, consultation), and triage category by Matrix. Patients in the limited activation and consultation groups were compared with patients with full activation by demographics, injuries, initial vital signs, procedures, delays to procedure, intensive care unit admission, length of stay, and mortality.ResultsSeven thousand thirty-one patients met activation criteria. Compliance with American College of Surgeons tiered activation criteria was 99%. The Matrix overtriage rate was 45% and undertriage was 24%. Of 2,282 patients with an ISS of 16 or greater, 1,026 were appropriately triaged (full activation), and 1,256 were undertriaged. Undertriaged patients had better Glasgow Coma Scale score, blood pressure, and base deficit than patients with full activation. Intensive care unit admission, hospital stays, and mortality were lower in the undertriaged group. The undertriaged group required fewer operative interventions with fewer delays to procedure.ConclusionDespite having an ISS of 16 or greater, patients with limited activations were dissimilar to patients with full activation. Level of activation and triage are not equivalent. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma full and tiered activation criteria are a robust means to have the appropriate personnel present based on the available prehospital information. Evaluation of the process of care, regardless of level of activation, should be used to evaluate trauma center performance.Level of evidenceTherapeutic and care management, level III
Recommended from our members
Attempting to validate the overtriage/undertriage matrix at a Level I trauma center.
BackgroundThe Optimal Resources Document mandates trauma activation based on injury mechanism, physiologic and anatomic criteria and recommends using the overtriage/undertriage matrix (Matrix) to evaluate the appropriateness of trauma team activation. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of the Matrix method by comparing patients appropriately triaged with those undertriaged. We hypothesized that these two groups are different, and Matrix does not discriminate the needs or outcomes of these different groups of patients.MethodsTrauma registry data, from January 2013 to December 2015, at a Level I trauma center, were reviewed. Overtriage and undertriage rates were calculated by Matrix. Patients with Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 16 or greater were classified by activation level (full, limited, consultation), and triage category by Matrix. Patients in the limited activation and consultation groups were compared with patients with full activation by demographics, injuries, initial vital signs, procedures, delays to procedure, intensive care unit admission, length of stay, and mortality.ResultsSeven thousand thirty-one patients met activation criteria. Compliance with American College of Surgeons tiered activation criteria was 99%. The Matrix overtriage rate was 45% and undertriage was 24%. Of 2,282 patients with an ISS of 16 or greater, 1,026 were appropriately triaged (full activation), and 1,256 were undertriaged. Undertriaged patients had better Glasgow Coma Scale score, blood pressure, and base deficit than patients with full activation. Intensive care unit admission, hospital stays, and mortality were lower in the undertriaged group. The undertriaged group required fewer operative interventions with fewer delays to procedure.ConclusionDespite having an ISS of 16 or greater, patients with limited activations were dissimilar to patients with full activation. Level of activation and triage are not equivalent. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma full and tiered activation criteria are a robust means to have the appropriate personnel present based on the available prehospital information. Evaluation of the process of care, regardless of level of activation, should be used to evaluate trauma center performance.Level of evidenceTherapeutic and care management, level III
Recommended from our members
Attempting to validate the over/under triage matrix at a level I trauma center.
The Optimal Resources Document (ORD) mandates trauma activation based on injury mechanism, physiologic and anatomic criteria and recommends using the over/undertriage matrix (Matrix) to evaluate the appropriateness of trauma team activation. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of the Matrix method by comparing patients appropriately triaged with those undertriaged. We hypothesized that these two groups are different and Matrix does not discriminate the needs or outcomes of these different groups of patients.Trauma registry data, from 1/2013-12/2015, at a Level I trauma center were reviewed. Over and undertriage rates were calculated by Matrix. Patients with ISS ≥16 were classified by activation level (full, limited, consultation), and triage category by Matrix. Patients in the limited activation and consultation groups were compared to patients with full activation by demographics, injuries, initial vital signs, procedures, delays to procedure, ICU admission, length of stay, and mortality.7031 patients met activation criteria. Compliance with ACS tiered activation criteria was 99%. The Matrix overtriage rate was 45% and undertriage was 24%. Of 2282 patients with an ISS ≥16, 1026 were appropriately triaged (full activation), and 1256 were under triaged. Undertriaged patients had better GCS, blood pressure, and BD than patients with full activation. ICU admission, hospital stays, and mortality were lower in the undertriaged group. The under triaged group required fewer operative interventions with fewer delays to procedure.Despite having an ISS ≥ 16, patients with limited activations were dissimilar to patients with full activation. Level of activation and triage are not equivalent. The ACS-COT full and tiered activation criteria are a robust means to have the appropriate personnel present based on available pre-hospital information. Evaluation of the process of care, regardless of level of activation should be used to evaluate trauma center performance.Level III Therapeutic and Care managementThis is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal
Recommended from our members
After the embo: predicting non-hemorrhagic indications for splenectomy after angioembolization in patients with blunt trauma.
BackgroundSuccessful non-operative management (NOM) of blunt splenic trauma is enhanced with splenic angioembolization (SAE). Patients may still require splenectomy post-SAE for splenic infarction/necrosis. Prior studies have used white blood cell count (WBC), platelet count (PLT), and PLT:WBC ratio after splenectomy to predict complications, but none have evaluated these findings prior to splenectomy in patients who have undergone SAE. Changes in these values may indicate clinically significant splenic infarction, facilitating management of these patients.MethodsPatients admitted to an American College of Surgeons verified level 1 trauma center from January 2007 to August 2017 who underwent SAE were identified. Patients with successful NOM after SAE (SAE/NOM) were compared with those requiring splenectomy (SAE/SPLEN). Data included demographics, splenic injury grade, Injury Severity Score (ISS), time to SAE and splenectomy, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay (LOS), and complete blood count. Lab values were analyzed immediately post-SAE (time 1) and day 5 post-SAE (or day of discharge) for SAE/NOM patients and day of SPLEN for SAE/SPLEN patients (time 2). Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U, χ2 tests, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves with significance attributed to P<0.05.ResultsOf 124 patients undergoing SAE, 16 (13%) later required SPLEN for infarction/necrosis at a median of 5 days post-SAE (IQR: 3-10 days). SAE/SPLEN and SAE/NOM patients did not differ by age, gender, ISS, or grade of splenic injury. SAE/SPLEN patients had longer hospital LOS (23 vs. 10 days, P<0.001). WBC, PLT, and PLT:WBC ratio did not differ between the groups at time 1. At time 2, WBC was higher and PLT:WBC ratio was lower in SAE/SPLEN patients. Using ROC curves at time 2, the area under the curve was 0.90 (P<0.001) for WBC and 0.71 (P<0.007) for PLT:WBC ratio.DiscussionPatients requiring splenectomy for clinically significant infarction/necrosis after SAE develop leukocytosis and decreased PLT:WBC ratio when compared with SAE/NOM patients. Monitoring these parameters allows more prompt diagnosis and operative intervention.Level of evidenceTherapeutic/care management, level III
Uphill treadmill running does not induce histopathological changes in the rat Achilles tendon
Background:
The purpose of this study was to investigate whether uphill treadmill running in rats created histopathological changes within the Achilles tendon consistent with Achilles tendinosis in humans.
Methods:
Twenty-six mature rats selectively bred for high-capacity running were divided into run and cage control groups. Run group rats ran on a treadmill at a 15° incline for a maximum duration of 1 hr/d, 5 d/wk for 9 weeks at increasing speeds, while rats in the cage control group maintained normal cage activity. After 9 weeks, Achilles tendons were harvested for histological processing and semi-quantitative histopathological analysis.
Results:
There were no significant group differences within each of the individual histopathological categories assessed (all p ≥ 0.16) or for total histopathological score (p = 0.14).
Conclusions:
Uphill treadmill running in rats selectively bred for high-capacity running did not generate Achilles tendon changes consistent with the histopathological presentation of Achilles tendinosis in humans.Medicine, Faculty ofPhysical Therapy, Department ofNon UBCReviewedFacult
Lower extremity amputation protocol: a pilot enhanced recovery pathway for vascular amputees
Vascular patients, an inherently older, frail population, account for >80% of major lower extremity amputations (transtibial or transfemoral) in the United States. Retrospective data have shown that early physical therapy and discharge to an acute rehabilitation facility decreases the postoperative length of stay (LOS) and expedites ambulation. In the present study, we sought to determine whether patients treated with the lower extremity amputation protocol (LEAP) will have improved outcomes. We performed a nonrandomized prospective study of vascular patients undergoing an amputation from January 2019 to February 2020. Patients who were nonambulatory or had undergone a previous contralateral major amputation were excluded. LEAP is a multidisciplinary team approach to the perioperative care of amputees using an outlined protocol. The prospective patients were compared with historic controls treated before the initiation of LEAP (January 2016 to December 2018). The primary outcomes included the postoperative LOS, time to receipt of a prosthesis, and time to ambulation. Of the 141 included patients, 130 were in the retrospective group and 11 in the LEAP group. The demographics and comorbidities were similar. All 11 LEAP patients had undergone a below-the-knee amputation, with 1 requiring revision to an above-the-knee amputation. Of the 130 retrospective patients, 122 (94%) had undergone a below-the-knee amputation, with 1 requiring revision to an above-the-knee amputation. The LEAP patients were more likely to be discharged to acute rehabilitation (100% vs 27%; P < .001), receive a prosthesis (100% vs 45%; P < .001), and ambulate with the prosthesis (100% vs 43%; P < .001). The LEAP patients had received physical therapy 2 days sooner than had the retrospective controls (P = .006) with a shorter postoperative LOS (3 days vs 6 days; P < .001). Of the patients who had received their prosthesis, the LEAP patients had received their prosthesis, on average, 2 months sooner than had the retrospective cohort (81 ± 39 days vs 137 ± 97 days, respectively; P = .002) and had ambulated with their prosthesis sooner (86 ± 53 days vs 146 ± 104 days, respectively; P = .002). No differences were found in the incidence of surgical site complications or unplanned readmissions between the two groups. The results from the present pilot study have demonstrated that the use of LEAP can significantly decrease postoperative LOS and expedite the time to independent ambulation with a prosthesis for vascular patients undergoing a major lower extremity amputation. These findings suggest a powerful ability to bridge the healthcare gap for this high-risk, underserved, and ethnically diverse population using a disease-specific standardized protocol