Missed injuries in trauma patients: A literature review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Overlooked injuries and delayed diagnoses are still common problems in the treatment of polytrauma patients. Therefore, ongoing documentation describing the incidence rates of missed injuries, clinically significant missed injuries, contributing factors and outcome is necessary to improve the quality of trauma care. This review summarizes the available literature on missed injuries, focusing on overlooked muscoloskeletal injuries.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Manuscripts dealing with missed injuries after trauma were reviewed. The following search modules were selected in PubMed: Missed injuries, Delayed diagnoses, Trauma, Musculoskeletal injuires. Three time periods were differentiated: (n = 2, 1980–1990), (n = 6, 1990–2000), and (n = 9, 2000-Present).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found a wide spread distribution of missed injuries and delayed diagnoses incidence rates (1.3% to 39%). Approximately 15 to 22.3% of patients with missed injuries had clinically significant missed injuries. Furthermore, we observed a decrease of missed pelvic and hip injuries within the last decade.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The lack of standardized studies using comparable definitions for missed injuries and clinically significant missed injuries call for further investigations, which are necessary to produce more reliable data. Furthermore, improvements in diagnostic techniques (e.g. the use of multi-slice CT) may lead to a decreased incidence of missed pelvic injuries. Finally, the standardized tertiary trauma survey is vitally important in the detection of clinically significant missed injuries and should be included in trauma care.</p

A systematic review of studies measuring health-related quality of life of general injury populations

Background. It is important to obtain greater insight into health-related quality of life (HRQL) of injury patients in order to document people's pathways to recovery and to quantify the impact of injury on population health over time. We performed a systematic review of studies measuring HRQL in general injury populations with a generic health state measure to summarize existing knowledge. Methods. Injury studies (1995-2009) were identified with main inclusion criteri

Tertiary Survey Performance in a Regional Trauma Hospital Without a Dedicated Trauma Service

Background: Initial management of trauma patients is focused on identifying life- and limb-threatening injuries and may lead to missed injuries. A tertiary survey can minimise the number and effect of missed injuries and involves a physical re-examination and review of all investigations within 24 h of admission. There is little information on current practice of tertiary survey performance in hospitals without a dedicated trauma service. We aimed to determine the rate of tertiary survey performance and the detail of documentation as well as the baseline rate of missed injuries. Methods: We performed a retrospective, descriptive study of all multitrauma patients who presented to an Australian level II regional trauma centre without a dedicated trauma service between May 2008 and February 2009. A medical records review was conducted to determine tertiary survey performance and missed injury rate. Results: Of 252 included trauma patients, 20% (n = 51) had a tertiary survey performed. A total of nine missed injuries were detected in eight patients (3.2%). Of the multiple components of the tertiary survey, most were poorly documented. Documentation was more comprehensive in the subgroup of patients who did have a formal tertiary survey. Conclusions: Tertiary survey performance was poor, as indicated by low documentation rates. The baseline missed injury rate was comparable to previous that of retrospective studies, although in this study an underestimation of true missed injury rates is likely. Implementing a formal, institutional tertiary survey may lead to improved tertiary survey performance and documentation and therefore improved trauma care in hospitals without a dedicated trauma service

Measuring the population burden of injuries-implications for global and national estimates: A multicentre prospective UK longitudinal study

Current methods of measuring the population burden of injuries rely on many assumptions and limited data available to the global burden of diseases (GBD) studies. The aim of this study was to compare the population burden of injuries using different approaches from the UK Burden of Injury (UKBOI) and GBD studies.The UKBOI was a prospective cohort of 1,517 injured individuals that collected patient-reported outcomes. Extrapolated outcome data were combined with multiple sources of morbidity and mortality data to derive population metrics of the burden of injury in the UK. Participants were injured patients recruited from hospitals in four UK cities and towns: Swansea, Nottingham, Bristol, and Guildford, between September 2005 and April 2007. Patient-reported changes in quality of life using the EQ-5D at baseline, 1, 4, and 12 months after injury provided disability weights used to calculate the years lived with disability (YLDs) component of disability adjusted life years (DALYs). DALYs were calculated for the UK and extrapolated to global estimates using both UKBOI and GBD disability weights. Estimated numbers (and rates per 100,000) for UK population extrapolations were 750,999 (1,240) for hospital admissions, 7,982,947 (13,339) for emergency department (ED) attendances, and 22,185 (36.8) for injury-related deaths in 2005. Nonadmitted ED-treated injuries accounted for 67% of YLDs. Estimates for UK DALYs amounted to 1,771,486 (82% due to YLDs), compared with 669,822 (52% due to YLDs) using the GBD approach. Extrapolating patient-derived disability weights to GBD estimates would increase injury-related DALYs 2.6-fold.The use of disability weights derived from patient experiences combined with additional morbidity data on ED-treated patients and inpatients suggests that the absolute burden of injury is higher than previously estimated. These findings have substantial implications for improving measurement of the national and global burden of injury

Prevalence and determinants of disabilities and return to work after major trauma

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence and determinants of disabilities and return to work after severe injury in a Dutch, Level I trauma center. METHODS: We prospectively included 295 patients with an Injury Severity Score > or = 16 treated between January 1996 and January 1999. All survivors received a mailed questionnaire in 2000, at least 1 year after their initial hospital admission. Health status was measured by the EuroQol-5D instrument, and the Glasgow Outcome Scale. Additional questions were asked about cognitive functioning and return-to-work rates. Regression analyses was conducted to explore the associations between these functional outcome measures and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 295 patients included, 99 (34%) died in hospital or during follow-up. From the 196 survivors, a response was obtained from 166 (85%). Of the survivors, 33% had to change their work or daily activity as a result of their injuries. Of the 127 patients of working age (18-65 years), 33 (26%) were unable to work and depended on social security. Problems with mobility, self-care, daily activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression, and cognitive ability were found in 34%, 15%, 51%, 58%, 37%, and 57%, respectively. The EuroQol-5D summary score (0.76) was far below that of the general population norms. The number of body areas affected, injury severity (Injury Severity Score > or = 25), and gender (female) were significant independent predictors of worse long-term functional outcome. CONCLUSION: Severe trauma has a substantial impact on long-term functioning. Empiric quantitative data, as presented in this study, enable us to estimate the burden of injury and to evaluate the quality of trauma care program