Efficacy and safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the treatment of acute pain after orthopedic trauma: a practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma and the Orthopedic Trauma Association

OBJECTIVES: Fracture is a common injury after a traumatic event. The efficacy and safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to treat acute pain related to fractures is not well established. METHODS: Clinically relevant questions were determined regarding NSAID use in the setting of trauma-induced fractures with clearly defined patient populations, interventions, comparisons and appropriately selected outcomes (PICO). These questions centered around efficacy (pain control, reduction in opioid use) and safety (non-union, kidney injury). A systematic review including literature search and meta-analysis was performed, and the quality of evidence was graded per the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The working group reached consensus on the final evidence-based recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies were identified for analysis. Not all outcomes identified as critically important were reported in all studies, and the outcome of pain control was too heterogenous to perform a meta-analysis. Nine studies reported on non-union (three randomized control trials), six of which reported no association with NSAIDs. The overall incidence of non-union in patients receiving NSAIDs compared with patients not receiving NSAIDs was 2.99% and 2.19% (p=0.04), respectively. Of studies reporting on pain control and reduction of opioids, the use of NSAIDs reduced pain and the need for opioids after traumatic fracture. One study reported on the outcome of acute kidney injury and found no association with NSAID use. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with traumatic fractures, NSAIDs appear to reduce post-trauma pain, reduce the need for opioids and have a small effect on non-union. We conditionally recommend the use of NSAIDs in patients suffering from traumatic fractures as the benefit appears to outweigh the small potential risks

Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multicenter Trial: Comparison of pre-injury antithrombotic use and reversal strategies among severe traumatic brain injury patients

BACKGROUND: Trauma teams are often faced with patients on antithrombotic (AT) drugs, which is challenging when bleeding occurs. We sought to compare the effects of different AT medications on head injury severity and hypothesized that AT reversal would not improve mortality in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients. METHODS: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma-sponsored prospective, multicentered, observational study of 15 trauma centers was performed. Patient demographics, injury burden, comorbidities, AT agents, and reversal attempts were collected. Outcomes of interest were head injury severity and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Analysis was performed on 2,793 patients. The majority of patients were on aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid [ASA], 46.1%). Patients on a platelet chemoreceptor blocker (P2Y12) had the highest mean Injury Severity Score (9.1 ± 8.1). Patients taking P2Y12 inhibitors ± ASA, and ASA-warfarin had the highest head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) mean (1.2 ± 1.6). On risk-adjusted analysis, warfarin-ASA was associated with a higher head AIS (odds ratio [OR], 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-4.42) after controlling for Injury Severity Score, Charlson Comorbidity Index, initial Glasgow Coma Scale score, and initial systolic blood pressure. Among patients with severe TBI (head AIS score, ≥3) on antiplatelet therapy, reversal with desmopressin (DDAVP) and/or platelet transfusion did not improve survival (82.9% reversal vs. 90.4% none, p = 0.30). In severe TBI patients taking Xa inhibitors who received prothrombin complex concentrate, survival was not improved (84.6% reversal vs. 84.6% none, p = 0.68). With risk adjustment as described previously, mortality was not improved with reversal attempts (antiplatelet agents: OR 0.83; 85% CI, 0.12-5.9 [p = 0.85]; Xa inhibitors: OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.12-4.64; p = 0.77). CONCLUSION: Reversal attempts appear to confer no mortality benefit in severe TBI patients on antiplatelet agents or Xa inhibitors. Combination therapy was associated with severity of head injury among patients taking preinjury AT therapy, with ASA-warfarin possessing the greatest risk. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level II

Whatever happens to trauma patients who leave against medical advice?

Background: Although trauma patients are frequently discharged against medical advice (AMA), the fate of these patients remains mostly unknown.Methods: Patients with traumatic injuries were identified in the California State Inpatient Database, 2007 to 2011. Readmission characteristics of patients discharged AMA were compared with patients discharged home.Results: There were 203,756 (75.65%) patients discharged home and 4,480 (1.66%) discharged AMA. Compared with those discharged home, patients discharged AMA had significantly higher 30-day readmission rates (17.12% vs 6.75%), rates of multiple readmissions (3.83% vs 1.12%), and likelihood of being readmitted at different hospitals (44.83% vs 33.82%) (all P \u3c .001). The commonest reasons for readmission in patients discharged AMA were psychiatric conditions [adjusted odds ratio: 1.67 (1.21 to 2.27)].Conclusions: Discharge AMA is associated with multiple readmissions and higher rates of readmissions at different hospitals. Early identification of vulnerable patients and improved modalities to prevent discharge AMA among these patients may reduce the negative outcomes associated with discharge AMA among trauma patients

Geographic distribution of trauma burden, mortality, and services in the United States: Does availability correspond to patient need?

Background: The association between the need for trauma care and trauma services has not been characterized previously. We compared the distribution of trauma admissions with state-level availability of trauma centers (TCs), surgical critical care (SCC) providers, and SCC fellowships, and assessed the association between trauma care provision and state-level trauma mortality.Study design: We obtained 2013 state-level data on trauma admissions, TCs, SCC providers, SCC fellowship positions, per-capita income, population size, and age-adjusted mortality rates. Normalized densities (per million population [PMP]) were calculated and generalized linear models were used to test associations between provision of trauma services (higher-level TCs, SCC providers, and SCC fellowship positions) and trauma burden, per-capita income, and age-adjusted mortality rates.Results: There were 1,345,024 trauma admissions (4,250 PMP), 2,496 SCC providers (7.89 PMP), and 1,987 TCs across the country, of which 521 were Level I or II (1.65 PMP). There was considerable variation between the top 5 and bottom 5 states in terms of Level I/Level II TCs and SCC surgeon availability (approximately 8.0/1.0), despite showing less variation in trauma admission density (1.5/1.0). Distribution of trauma admissions was positively associated with SCC provider density and age-adjusted trauma mortality (p ≤ 0.001), and inversely associated with per-capita income (p \u3c 0.001). Age-adjusted mortality was inversely associated with the number of SCC providers PMP. For every additional SCC provider PMP, there was a decrease of 618 deaths per year.Conclusions: There is an inequitable distribution of trauma services across the US. Increases in the density of SCC providers are associated with decreases in mortality. There was no association between density of trauma admissions and location of Level I/Level II TCs. In the wake of efforts to regionalize TCs, additional efforts are needed to address disparities in the provision of quality care to trauma patients

Charges, length of stay, and complication associations with trauma center ownership in adult patients with mild to moderate trauma

Background: For-profit (FP) trauma centers (TCs) charge more for trauma care than not-for-profit (NFP) centers. We sought to determine charges, length of stay (LOS), and complications associations with TC ownership status (FP, NFP, and government) for three diagnoses among patients with overall low injury severity. Methods: Adult patients treated at TCs with an International Classification of Diseases-based injury severity score (ICISS) survival probability ≥ 0.85 were identified. Only those who with a principal diagnosis of femur, tibial or rib fractures were included. Results: Total charges were significantly higher at FP centers than NFP and lower at government centers (89.6% and -12.8%, respectively). FP TCs had a 12.5% longer LOS and government TCs had a 20.4% longer LOS than NFP TCs. Conclusion: Patients presenting to FP TCs with mild/moderate femur, tibial, or rib fractures experienced higher charges and increased LOS compared with government or NFP centers. There was no difference in overall complication rates.Journal ArticlePre-prin

Association of postsurgical opioid refills for patients with risk of opioid misuse and chronic opioid use among family members.

Question: What is the association between a patient’s new opioid exposure after hospital discharge and subsequent opioid misuse and chronic opioid use in family members in the same household? Findings: In this cohort study of 843 531 patient and family member pairs, each additional opioid prescription refill for the patients was associated with increased hazard of opioid misuse among family members in adjusted models. The risk of opioid misuse and chronic opioid use increased in households in which the patient obtained refills. Meaning: Findings of this study suggest that family members in a household with a patient who received opioid prescription refills may have an increased risk of opioid misuse and chronic opioid use

How long should we fear? Long-term risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with traumatic brain injury

Background: Although patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) are known to be at high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE), it is not clear how long this risk persists after injury. We aimed to determine the risk of VTE in patients with TBI during one year after injury and to identify associated factors.Methods: Patients 18 years and older with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnoses of isolated TBI (head Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] ≥3 and AIS \u3c3 for all other body regions) were identified in the California State Inpatient Database (2007-2011). Patient and admission (injury severity score, length of stay, and discharge disposition) characteristics were assessed. Hospital factors (teaching status, trauma center verification, and bed size) were extracted from the American Hospital Association database. Patients who developed VTE during the index admission and at different time points after discharge were determined. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess the associated risk factors for VTE after discharge.Results: There were 38,984 patients with isolated TBI identified. The incidence of VTE was 1.31% during the index admission and the cumulative incidence of VTE involving hospitalization within one year of injury was 2.83%. The major risk factors for VTE one year after injury (not including the index admission) were discharge to extended care facilities versus home [adjusted odds ratio, 2.69 (95% confidence interval, 2.14-3.37)], age older than 64 years versus 18 to 44 years [2.62 (1.80-3.81)], having an operation during the index admission [1.65 (1.36-2.01)], and hospital length of stay of more than 7 days versus 3 days or less [1.64 (1.27-2.11)].Conclusion: The risk of VTE persists long after discharge in a significant proportion of patients with TBI. Demographic and admission characteristics of patients play significant roles in the risk of VTE after discharge. These results highlight the need for sustained surveillance and preventive measures among patients with TBI at increased risk for long-term VTE.Level of evidence: Epidemiologic study, level III

The truth about trauma readmissions

Background: There is a paucity of data on the causes and associated patient factors for unplanned readmissions among trauma patients. Methods: We examined patients admitted for traumatic injuries between 2007 and 2011 in the California State Inpatient Database. Using chi-square tests and multivariate logistic regression models, we determined rates, reasons, locations, and patient factors associated with 30-day readmissions. Results: Among 252,752 trauma discharges, the overall readmission rate was 7.56%, with 36% of readmissions occurring at a hospital different from the hospital of initial admission. Predictors of readmissions included being discharged against medical advice (odds ratio [OR]: 2.56 [2.35 to 2.76]); Charlson scores ≥2 (OR: 2.00 [1.91 to 2.10]); and age ≥45 years (OR: 1.29 [1.25 to 1.33]). Major reasons for readmissions were musculoskeletal complaints (22.29%), psychiatric conditions (9.40%), and surgical infections (6.69%). Conclusions: Health and social vulnerabilities influence readmission among trauma patients, with many readmitted at other hospitals. Targeted interventions among high-risk patients may reduce readmissions after traumatic injurie

Disparities in demographics and outcomes based on trauma center ownership

Introduction: Ownership may influence trauma center (TC) location. For-profit (FP) TCs require a favorable payor mix to thrive, whereas not-for-profit (NFP) centers may rely on government funding, grants, and patient volume. We hypothesized that the demographics of trauma patients would be different for NFP and FP TCs due to ownership type. We also hypothesized that these demographic differences might be associated with outcomes such as length of stay, reported complications, and mortality. Methods: We used the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) 2016-2017 inpatient dataset to examine differences in outcomes by trauma center ownership type. Negative binomial and logistical regression was used to compare trauma ownership, length of stay (LOS), reported complications, and mortality of severely injured nonelderly adult trauma patients. Results: Our study analyzed risk factors and outcomes for 10,700 trauma alert patients. Patients treated at FP TCs were less likely to be Black (OR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.62-0.78), to be uninsured (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.36-0.45), have Medicare (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.43-0.66), or Medicaid (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.50-0.65) (all P < 0.001). Patients treated at FP centers were less likely to have comorbidities (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.96) and were associated with a longer LOS (0.10, 95% 0.05-0.15, P < 0.001) in nonelderly adult trauma patients. FP TCs were associated with fewer reported complications (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.94) and were associated with a higher likelihood of mortality in nonelderly adults (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.35-2.12, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Among this cohort of severe International Classification of Diseases-based injury severity score (ICISS) patients, complications were less likely, but LOS and mortality were increased among FP TC patients. FP centers cared for fewer patients who were Black, uninsured, or who were Medicare/Medicaid/noncommercial insurance.Journal Articl