Trauma Activation Patients Research Articles

Physical Examination is a Poor Screening Test for Abdominal-Pelvic Injury in Adult Blunt Trauma Patients

To determine if physical examination can reliably detect or exclude abdominal or pelvic injury in adult trauma activation patients. Trauma registry and medical record data were retrospectively reviewed for all adult blunt trauma patients with Glasgow coma scale score>8, from 6/30/05 to 12/31/06. Attending surgeons' dictated admission history and physical examination reports were individually reviewed. Patients' subjective reports of abdominal pain were recorded as present or absent. Exam findings of the lower ribs, abdomen, and pelvis were each separately recorded as positive or negative, and were compared with findings on a subsequent objective evaluation of the abdomen (OEA). "Clinically significant" injuries were defined as those that would change patient management. One thousand six hundred sixty-three patients were studied. Of patients with a negative abdominal exam, 10% had a positive OEA. When abdominal pain was absent, and exam of the lower ribs, abdomen, and pelvis was normal, OEA was positive in 7.6%, and 5.7% had a clinically significant injury. While a positive abdominal exam was predictive of a positive OEA (P<0.01), a negative exam, even when broadened (pain, lower ribs, abdomen, pelvis) did not exclude significant injuries. Ten percent of trauma activation patients with a negative abdominal exam have occult abdominal/pelvic injuries. Even when exam of the lower ribs, abdomen, and pelvis are all negative and abdominal pain is absent, 5.7% have occult injuries that would change management. OEA should be used liberally for adult blunt trauma activation patients regardless of physical exam findings, to avoid missing clinically significant injuries.

Observation unit admission as an alternative to inpatient admission for trauma activation patients

Background:At this 35 000 visits/year emergency department (ED) at a level one trauma centre, a trauma protocol was implemented for the ED observation unit. Data on all trauma observation unit...

269: Emergency Department Observation Unit Admission as an Alternative to Inpatient Admission for Trauma Activation Patients

Many emergency department observation units do not have protocols in place for observation of patients who present as trauma activations. At our 35,000 visits/year ED in a level one trauma center, we implemented a trauma protocol for the emergency department observation unit. We then collected data on all trauma observation unit admissions to evaluate for safety, efficiency and admission rates, and compared this to data from the same period for a more traditional, accepted observation unit protocol: the chest pain protocol.

QS249. Is the Lateral Cervical Spine Plain Film Obsolete

Background: Physical examination has been shown to be extremely inaccurate in cervical spine evaluation in trauma activation patients as compared to the “gold standard” of computed tomography of the cervical spine (CTC). The objective of the current study is to determine the utility of a lateral cervical spine plain film (the recommended initial approach by ATLS) in the evaluation of blunt trauma patients. Methods: We prospectively evaluated blunt trauma patients from February 2004 to September 2006.

Factors Affecting Emergency Department Opioid Administration to Severely Injured Patients

Studies of emergency department (ED) pain management in patients with trauma have been mostly restricted to patients with fractures, yet the potential for undertreatment of more severely injured patients is great. The authors sought to identify factors associated with failure to receive ED opioid administration in patients with acute trauma who subsequently required hospitalization. At an urban Level 1 trauma center and teaching hospital, a retrospective cohort study of trauma team activation patients requiring hospitalization between January 1 and December 31, 1999, was conducted. The authors excluded patients receiving opioids only within ten minutes of chest tube insertion or fracture manipulation. The main outcome measure was ED opioid administration. A total of 540 charts of hospitalized first-tier trauma team activation patients were reviewed. A total of 258 (47.8%) received intravenous opioid analgesia within three hours of ED arrival. The median time to receiving the first dose of opioids was 95 minutes. Patients were independently less likely to receive opioids if they were younger or older, were intubated, had a lower Revised Trauma Score, or did not require fracture manipulation. Patients with these factors were less likely to receive opioids independent of the amount of time they spent in the ED. Many trauma activation patients requiring hospitalization do not receive opioid analgesia in the ED. Patients at particular risk for oligoanalgesia include those who are younger or older and those who are more seriously injured, as defined by a lower Revised Trauma Score, lower Glasgow Coma Scale score, and intubation.

Blunt Trauma Abdominal and Pelvic Computed Tomography Has Low Yield for Injuries in More Than One Anatomic Region.

IntroductionMost trauma centers order abdominal and pelvic computed tomography (CT) as an automatically paired CT for adult blunt trauma evaluation. However, excessive CT utilization adds risks of excessive exposure to ionizing radiation, the need to work up incidental findings (leading to unnecessary and invasive tests), and greater costs. Examining a cohort of adult blunt trauma patients that received paired abdominal and pelvic (A/P) CT, we sought to determine the diagnostic yield of clinically significant injuries (CSI) in the following: 1) the abdomen alone; 2) the pelvis alone; 3) the lumbosacral spine alone; and 4) more than one of these anatomic regions concomitantly.MethodsIn this retrospective study, we reviewed the imaging and hospital course of a consecutive sample of blunt trauma activation patients older than 14 years of age who received paired A/P CT during their blunt trauma assessments at an urban Level I trauma center from April through October 2014. Categorization of CSI was determined according to an a priori, expert panel-derived classification scheme.ResultsThe median age of the 689 patients who had A/P CT was 48 years old; 68.1% were male; 64.0% were admitted, and hospital mortality was 3.6%. CSI yields were as follows: abdomen 2.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] [1.3–3.6%]); pelvis 2.9% (95% CI [1.9–4.4%]); lumbosacral spine 0.6% (95% CI [0.2–1.5%]); both abdomen and pelvis 0.3% (95% CI [0.1–1.1%]); both the abdomen and lumbosacral spine 0.6% (0.2–1.5%); both the pelvis and lumbosacral spine 0.1% (0.0–0.8%); all three regions – abdomen, pelvis and lumbosacral spine – 0.1% (0.0–0.8%).ConclusionAutomatic pairing of A/P CT has very low diagnostic yield for CSI in both the abdomen and pelvis. These data suggest a role for selective CT imaging protocols that image these regions individually instead of automatically as a pair.