Dataset Information

The influence of sociodemographic factors on trauma center transport for severely injured older adults.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To examine sociodemographic predictors of trauma center (TC) transport of severely injured older adults.

Data sources

The data source was the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, New York Inpatient Database (2014).

Study design

This study was a secondary analysis of injured older adults. Key sociodemographic variables were age, gender, race/ethnicity, median household income, and primary payer. Confounding variables were injury severity, geographic location, number of chronic conditions, and injury mechanism. The outcome variable was TC transport.

Data collection/extraction methods

The database was filtered on the following criteria: age =/> 55 years, primary diagnosis of injury (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM], 800.0-957.9, excluding poisoning, late effects, and interfacility transfers), admitted to an acute care hospital in New York.

Principal findings

Records of 33 696 patients were included. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that all variables were statistically significant predictors of TC transport except primary payer. Predictors of TC transport were as follows: higher injury severity (OR 2.1, CI 1.79-2.46; 3.39, CI 2.85-4.05); Asian/Pacific and Hispanic race/ethnicity (OR 2.51, CI 1.92-3.27; OR 1.1, CI 0.86-1.42), highest median household income (OR 1.24, CI 1.01-1.52), high population density (OR 1.32, CI 1.12-1.55; OR 3.2, CI 2.68-2.83), and vehicle crashes (OR 3.39, CI 2.79-4.11). Predictors of non-TC transport were as follows: older age groups (OR 0.92, CI 0.76-1.11; OR 0.79, CI 0.64-0.96; OR 0.77, CI 0.63-0.95), females (OR 0.65, CI 0.57-0.74), Black and "other" race (OR 0.75, CI 0.0.56-1.0; OR 0.96, CI 0.77-1.20), lower median household income (OR 0.76, CI 0.62-0.93; OR 0.86, CI 0.71-1.05), low population density (OR 0.96, CI 0.67-1.36; OR 0.89, CI 0.53-1.51), and number of chronic conditions (OR 0.89, CI 0.87-0.91).

Conclusions

Sociodemographic factors are a source of disparity for access to TCs. Further research is needed to confirm bias and test bias reduction strategies. Comprehensive education and policies are needed to reduce disparities in access to trauma care.

SUBMITTER: Scheetz LJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7240777 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Trauma is the leading cause of potential years of life lost before age 65 years in the United States. Timely care in a designated trauma center has been shown to reduce mortality by 25%. However, many severely injured patients are not transferred to trauma centers after initially being seen at non–trauma center emergency departments (EDs).To determine patient-level and hospital-level factors associated with the decision to admit rather than transfer severely injured patients who are initially seen at non–trauma center EDs and to ascertain whether insured patients are more likely to be admitted than transferred compared with uninsured patients.Retrospective analysis of the 2009 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample. We included all ED encounters for major trauma (Injury Severity Score, >15) seen at non–trauma centers in patients aged 18 to 64 years. We excluded ED discharges and ED deaths. We quantified the absolute risk difference between admission vs transfer by insurance status, while adjusting for age, sex, mechanism of injury, Injury Severity Score, weekend admission and month of visit, and urban vs rural status and median household income of the home zip code, as well as annual ED visit volume and teaching status and US region.Inpatient admission vs transfer to another acute care facility.In 2009, a total of 4513 observations from 636 non–trauma center EDs were available for analysis, representing a nationally weighted population of 19,312 non–trauma center ED encounters for major trauma. Overall, 54.5% in 2009 were admitted to the non–trauma center. Compared with patients without insurance, the adjusted absolute risk of admission vs transfer was 14.3% (95% CI, 9.2%-19.4%) higher for patients with Medicaid and 11.2% (95% CI, 6.9%-15.4%) higher for patients with private insurance. Other factors associated with admission vs transfer included severe abdominal injuries (risk difference, 15.9%; 95% CI, 9.4%-22.3%), urban teaching hospital vs non–teaching hospital (risk difference, 26.2%; 95% CI, 15.2%-37.2%), and annual ED visit volume (risk difference, 3.4%; 95% CI, 1.6%-5.3% higher for every additional 10,000 annual ED visits).Patients with severe injuries initially evaluated at non–trauma center EDs were less likely to be transferred if insured and were at risk of receiving suboptimal trauma care. Efforts in monitoring and optimizing trauma interhospital transfers and outcomes at the population level are warranted.

Project description:PurposeWhile survival rates after a trauma are increasing a considerable part of the trauma population are still at risk for both short and long term disabilities. Little is known about prognostic factors over time after a severe trauma. The aim of the present prospective cohort study was to examine trauma and patient related prognostic factors for a lower health status over time after a severe trauma.MethodsA multicentre prospective observational cohort study was conducted. Adult trauma patients with severe injuries (ISS???16) were included from August 2015 until November 2016 if admitted to one of the hospitals in Noord-Brabant (the Netherlands). Outcome measure was health status, measured by the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D utility and EQ-Visual analogue scale) and the Health Utilities Index (HUI2 and HUI3) one week and one, three, six, and twelve months after injury. Patient and trauma characteristics were analysed as prognostic factors with linear mixed models. The effect of each prognostic factor over time was analysed by adding the interaction term between the prognostic factor and time point in a multivariable linear mixed model, adjusted for confounders. Additionally, the risk factors for problems in the EQ-5 dimensions of HS and cognition were analysed.ResultsIn total 239 severely injured patients participated. Pre-injury health status, hospital length of stay, ISS and comorbidities were significant prognostic factors for a lower health status. A younger age and extremity injury were prognostic factors for a lower health status until one month after trauma and unemployment before trauma and comorbidities six until twelve months after trauma. In the EQ-5 dimensions 44.1% remained problems in mobility, 15.3% in self-care, 46.4% in activity, 53.3% in pain, 32.5% in anxiety and 35.7% in cognition.ConclusionsLower pre-injury health status, longer hospital length of stay, higher ISS, and comorbidities were significant prognostic factors for a lower health status during one year after a severe injury. A younger age and an extremity injury were short-term prognostic factors and unemployment before trauma and comorbidities were long-term prognostic factors. Even after twelve months patients in our population reported more problems in all EQ-5D dimensions when compared to the Dutch reference population.

Project description:BackgroundThe presence of in-house attending trauma surgeons has improved efficiency of processes in the treatment of polytrauma patients. However, literature remains equivocal regarding the influence of the presence of in-house attendings on mortality. In our hospital there is a double trauma surgeon on-call system. In this system an in-house trauma surgeon is 24/7 backed up by a second trauma surgeon to assist with urgent surgery or multiple casualties. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcome in severely injured patients in this unique trauma system.MethodsFrom 2014 to 2021, a prospective population-based cohort consisting of consecutive polytrauma patients aged ≥ 15 years requiring both urgent surgery (≤ 24h) and admission to Intensive Care Unit (ICU) was investigated. Demographics, treatment, outcome parameters and pre- and in-hospital transfer times were analyzed.ResultsThree hundred thirteen patients with a median age of 44 years (71% male), and median Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 33 were included. Mortality rate was 19% (68% due to traumatic brain injury). All patients stayed ≤ 32 min in ED before transport to either CT or OR. Fifty-one percent of patients who needed damage control surgery (DCS) had a more deranged physiology, needed more blood products, were more quickly in OR with shorter time in OR, than patients with early definitive care (EDC). There was no difference in mortality rate between DCS and EDC patients. Fifty-six percent of patients had surgery during off-hours. There was no difference in outcome between patients who had surgery during daytime and during off-hours. Death could possibly have been prevented in 1 exsanguinating patient (1.7%).ConclusionIn this cohort of severely injured patients in need of urgent surgery and ICU support it was demonstrated that surgical decision making was swift and accurate with low preventable death rates. 24/7 Physical presence of a dedicated trauma team has likely contributed to these good outcomes.