Abstract
The care of patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is complex and confounded by uncertainty in prognoses. Studies have demonstrated significant unexplained variation in mortality between centers. Possible explanations include differences in the quality and intensity of care across centers, including the appropriateness and timing of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies. We postulated that centers with a preponderance of early deaths might have a more pessimistic approach to the TBI patient, which would be reflected in an increased hospital TBI-related mortality. This is a retrospective cohort study. Time to death was used as a proxy for time to withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies. Centers were classified as early or late based on when the majority (75th percentile) of their TBI-related deaths occurred. We evaluated the association between adjusted mortality and center classification using a hierarchical multivariable model. Two hundred trauma centers contributing data to the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program from 2010 through 2013 were involved. The cohort included 17,505 patients with severe isolated TBI. One hundred eight centers were classified as early centers. The 75th percentile for time to death was 4 days among early centers versus 7 days in late centers. Mortality was 34% and 33%, respectively. After adjustment for case mix, care in an early center was not associated with increased odds of death (adjusted odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.09). Higher odds of death were independently associated with age, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score, multiple comorbidities, traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, intracerebral mass lesions, brainstem lesions, and signs of compressed or absent basal cisterns. Centers rendering early decisions related to withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in TBI patients, as measured by time until death, do not have worse outcomes than those making later decisions. How and when these decisions are made requires further exploration to balance an opportunity for clinical improvement with appropriate resource use. Prognostic and epidemiologic study, level III.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.