Dataset Information

Physician-Led Thoracic Trauma Management in a Specialist Emergency Care Centre.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Falls cause 75% of trauma in patients above 65 years of age, and thoracic trauma is the second commonest injury; rib fractures are the most common thoracic injury. These patients have up to 12% mortality, with 31% developing pneumonias. There is wide variation in care. Northumbria Healthcare has a team of respiratory consultants, physiotherapists, specialist nurses and anesthetists for thoracic-trauma management on a respiratory support unit.

Methods

With Caldicott approval, basic demographics and clinical outcomes of patients admitted with thoracic trauma between 20 August-21 April were analyzed. A descriptive statistical methodology was applied.

Results

A total of 119 patients were identified with a mean age of 71.1 years (range 23-97). Of the 119 patients, 53 were male, 66 females. The main mechanism of injury was falls from standing (65) and falls down stairs/bed or in the bath (18). Length of stay was 7.3 days (range 1-54). In total, 85 patients had more than one co-morbidity, 26 had a full trauma assessment and 75 had pan CTs. The mean number of rib fractures was 3.6 and 31 (26%) patients had a pneumothorax and/or haemothorax. A total of 18 chest drains were inserted (all small bore) and one needle aspiration was performed. No cardiothoracic input was required. Isolated chest trauma was present only in 45 patients. All patients had a pain team review, 22 erector spinae catheters were inserted with 2 paravertebral blocks. Overall, 82 patients did not require oxygen, 1 required CPAP and 1 HFNC. 7 needed intensive care transfer. Furthermore, 20 (17%) developed pneumonias and 16 (14%) deaths occurred within 30 days-all were in those with falls from standing. There was no correlation between number of fractured ribs, length of stay and mortality.

Conclusions

High level care for thoracic trauma can be performed by a physician led team. Overall, 42% pneumothoraces/haemothoraces were observed. Further large scale randomised trials are warranted for definitive outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Bates-Powell J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8709173 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The delivery of emergency, trauma, critical, and intensive care services requires coordination among all members of the care team. Perceived teamwork and role clarity may vary among physicians (MDs) and nurse practitioners (NPs). PURPOSE:To examine differences in perceived roles and responsibilities of NPs and MDs practicing in emergency, trauma, critical, and intensive care. METHODS:Secondary Analysis of the National Survey of Emergency, Intensive, and Critical Care Nurse Practitioners and Physicians, a cross-sectional national survey of clinicians. Mail survey of randomly selected stratified cross-sectional samples of MDs and NPs drawn from national lists of clinicians in eligible specialties working in emergency, trauma, intensive, and critical care units in the United States. 814 clinicians (351 NPs and 463 MDs) were recruited from national by postal mail survey. Our initial sample included n = 2,063 clinicians, n = 1,031 NPs and n = 1,032 MDs in eligible specialties. Of these, 63.5% of NPs and 70.1% of MDs completed and returned the survey excluding those who were ineligible due to lack of current practice in a relevant specialty. FINDINGS:NPs in ICU/CCU are more likely to be female and report working fewer hours than do MDs and provide direct care to more patients. 55% of NPs and 82% of MDs agree that their individual role in their unit is clear (p < .001); 34% of MDs and 42% of NPs agree that their unit is an example of excellent team work among professionals (p = 0.021); 41% of MD and 37% of NP clinicians (p = 0.061) agree that their teams are "prepared to provide outstanding care in a crisis or disaster." Perceived role clarity was significantly associated with increased perceptions of excellent teamwork and disaster preparedness. DISCUSSION:At the time of this survey, and majority of NPs and MDs working in emergency, critical and intensive care did not agree that their teams were prepared for a crisis or disaster. Leaders of health organizations should encourage teamwork and professional role clarity to assist units to perform effectively in emergency and disaster preparedness.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough the results of previous studies suggested the effectiveness of physician-led prehospital trauma management, it has been uncertain because of the limited number of high-quality studies. Furthermore, the advantage of physician-led prehospital management might have been overestimated due to the shortened prehospital time by helicopter transportation in some studies. The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of physician-led prehospital management independent of prehospital time. Also, subgroup analysis was performed to explore the subpopulation that especially benefit from physician-led prehospital management.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed the data of Japan's nationwide trauma registry. Severe blunt trauma patients, defined by Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥16, who were transported directly to a hospital between April 2009 and March 2019 were evaluated. In-hospital mortality was compared between groups dichotomized by the occupation of primary prehospital healthcare provider (i.e., physician or paramedic), using 1:4 propensity score-matched analysis. The propensity score was calculated using potential confounders including patient demographics, mechanism of injury, vital signs at the scene of injury, ISS, and total time from injury to hospital arrival. Subpopulations that especially benefit from physician-led prehospital management were explored by assessing interaction effects between physician-led prehospital management and patient characteristics.ResultsA total of 30,551 patients (physician-led: 2976, paramedic-led: 27,575) were eligible for analysis, of whom 2690 propensity score-matched pairs (physician-led: 2690, paramedic-led: 10,760) were generated and compared. Physician-led group showed significantly decreased in-hospital mortality than paramedic-led group (in-hospital mortality: 387 [14.4%] and 1718 [16.0%]; odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.88 [0.78-1.00], p = 0.044). Patients with age < 65 years, ISS ≥25, Abbreviated Injury Scale in pelvis and lower extremities ≥3, and total prehospital time < 60 min were likely to benefit from physician-led prehospital management.ConclusionsPhysician-led prehospital trauma management was significantly associated with reduced in-hospital mortality independent of prehospital time. The findings of exploratory subgroup analysis would be useful for the future research to establish efficient dispatch system of physician team.

Project description:BackgroundEmergency medical services regularly encounter severe burns. As standards of care are relatively well-established regarding their hospital management, prehospital care is comparatively poorly defined. The aim of this study was to describe burned patients taken care of by our physician-staffed emergency medical service (PEMS).MethodsAll patients directly transported by our PEMS to our burn centre between January 2008 and December 2017 were retrospectively enrolled. We specifically addressed three "burn-related" variables: prehospital and hospital burn size estimations, type and volume of infusion and pain assessment and management. We divided patients into two groups for comparison: TBSA < 20% and ≥ 20%. We a priori defined clinically acceptable limits of agreement in the small and large burn group to be ±5% and ± 10%, respectively.ResultsWe included 86 patients whose median age was 26 years (IQR 12-51). The median prehospital TBSA was 10% (IQR 6-25). The difference between the prehospital and hospital TBSA estimations was outside the limits of agreement at 6.2%. The limits of agreement found in the small and large burn groups were - 5.3, 4.4 and - 10.1, 11, respectively. Crystalloid infusion was reported at a median volume of 0.8 ml/kg/TBSA (IQR 0.3-1.4) during the prehospital phase, which extrapolated over the first 8 h would equal to a median volume of 10.5 ml/kg/TBSA. The median verbal numeric rating scale on scene was 6 (IQR 3-8) and 3 (IQR 2-5) at the hospital (p < 0.001). Systemic analgesia was provided to 61 (71%) patients, predominantly with fentanyl (n = 59; 69%), followed by ketamine (n = 7; 8.1%). The median doses of fentanyl and ketamine were 1.7 mcg/kg (IQR 1-2.6) and 2.1 mg/kg (IQR 0.3-3.2), respectively.ConclusionsWe found good agreement in burn size estimations. The quantity of crystalloid infused was higher than the recommended amount, suggesting a potential risk for fluid overload. Most patients benefited from a correct systemic analgesia. These results emphasized the need for dedicated guidelines and decision support aids for the prehospital management of burned patients.

Project description:ImportancePeer relationships may motivate physicians to aspire to high professional standards but have not been a major focus of quality improvement efforts.ObjectiveTo determine whether peer relationships between primary care physicians (PCPs) and specialists formed during training motivate improved specialist care for patients.Design, setting, and participantsIn this quasi-experimental study, difference-in-differences analysis was used to estimate differences in experiences with specialist care reported by patients of the same PCP for specialists who did vs did not co-train with the PCP, controlling for any differences in patient ratings of the same specialists in the absence of co-training ties. Specialist visits resulting from PCP referrals from 2016 to 2019 in a large health system were analyzed, including a subset of undirected referrals in which PCPs did not specify a specialist. Data were collected from January 2016 to December 2019 and analyzed from March 2020 to October 2022.ExposureThe exposure was PCP-specialist overlap in training (medical school or postgraduate medical) at the same institution for at least 1 year (co-training).Main outcomes and measuresComposite patient experience rating of specialist care constructed from Press Ganey's Medical Practice Survey.ResultsOf 9920 specialist visits for 8655 patients (62.9% female; mean age, 57.4 years) with 502 specialists in 13 specialties, 3.1% (306) involved PCP-specialist dyads with a co-training tie. Co-training ties between PCPs and specialists were associated with a 9.0 percentage point higher adjusted composite patient rating of specialist care (95% CI, 5.6-12.4 percentage points; P < .001), analogous to improvement from the median to the 91st percentile of specialist performance. This association was stronger for PCP-specialist dyads with full temporal overlap in training (same class or cohort) and consistently strong for 9 of 10 patient experience items, including clarity of communication and engagement in shared decision-making. In secondary analyses of objective markers of altered specialist practice in an expanded sample of visits not limited by the availability of patient experience data, co-training was associated with changes in medication prescribing, suggesting behavioral changes beyond interpersonal communication. Patient characteristics varied minimally by co-training status of PCP-specialist dyads. Results were similar in analyses restricted to undirected referrals (in which PCPs did not specify a specialist). Concordance between PCPs and specialists in physician age, sex, medical school graduation year, and training institution (without requiring temporal overlap) was not associated with better care experiences.Conclusions and relevanceIn this quasi-experimental study, PCP-specialist co-training elicited changes in specialist care that substantially improved patient experiences, suggesting potential gains from strategies encouraging the formation of stronger physician-peer relationships.

Project description:PURPOSE:Thoracic ultrasound (TUS) has been proposed as an easy-option replacement for chest X-ray (CXR) in emergency diagnosis of pneumonia, pleural effusion, and pneumothorax. We investigated CXR unforeseen diagnosis, subsequently investigated by TUS, considering its usefulness in clinical risk assessment and management and also assessing the sustainability of telementoring. PATIENTS AND METHODS:This observational report includes a period of 6 months with proactive concurrent adjunctive TUS diagnosis telementoring, which was done using freely available smartphone applications for transfer of images and movies. RESULTS:Three hundred and seventy emergency TUS scans (excluding trauma patients) were performed and telementored. In 310 cases, no significant chest pathology was detected either by CXR, TUS, or the subsequent work-up; in 24 patients, there was full concordance between TUS and CXR (ten isolated pleural effusion; eleven pleural effusion with lung consolidations; and three lung consolidation without pleural effusion); in ten patients with lung consolidations, abnormalities identified by CXR were not detected by TUS. In 26 patients, only TUS diagnosis criteria of disease were present: in 19 patients, CXR was not diagnostic, ie, substantially negative, but TUS detected these conditions correctly, and these were later confirmed by computed tomography (CT). In seven patients, even if chest disease was identified by CXR, such diagnoses were significantly modified by ultrasound, and CT confirmed that TUS was more appropriate. The overall respective individual performances of CXR and TUS for the diagnosis of a pleural-pulmonary disease in emergency are good, with accuracy >95%. CONCLUSION:About 20% of pneumonia cases were detectable only by CXR and 20% only by TUS and not by CXR; ie, about 40% of patients may have been misdiagnosed if, by chance, only one of the two tools had been used. The concurrent use of TUS and CXR increases the overall sensitivity and specificity. The contribution of expert telementoring and final reappraisal is a valuable and sustainable element for emergency physicians' training and performance, contributing reasonably to mitigation of clinical risks.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the association between emergency medicine physician supervision and 3-day mortality for patients receiving care from non-physician clinicians in a task-sharing model of emergency care in rural Uganda.DesignRetrospective cohort analysis with multivariable logistic regression.SettingSingle rural Ugandan emergency unit.ParticipantsAll patients presenting for care from 2009 to 2019.InterventionsThree cohorts of patients receiving care from non-physician clinicians had three different levels of physician supervision: 'Direct Supervision' (2009-2010) emergency medicine physicians directly supervised all care; 'Indirect Supervision' (2010-2015) emergency medicine physicians were consulted as needed; 'Independent Care' (2015-2019) no emergency medicine physician supervision.Primary outcome measureThree-day mortality.Results38 033 ED visits met inclusion criteria. Overall mortality decreased significantly across supervision cohorts ('Direct' 3.8%, 'Indirect' 3.3%, 'Independent' 2.6%, p<0.001), but so too did the rates of patients who presented with ≥3 abnormal vitals ('Direct' 32%, 'Indirect' 19%, 'Independent' 13%, p<0.001). After controlling for vital sign abnormalities, 'Direct' and 'Indirect' supervision were both significantly associated with reduced OR for mortality ('Direct': 0.57 (0.37 to 0.90), 'Indirect': 0.71 (0.55 to 0.92)) when compared with 'Independent Care'. Sensitivity analysis showed that this mortality benefit was significant for the minority of patients (17.2%) with ≥3 abnormal vitals ('Direct': 0.44 (0.22 to 0.85), 'Indirect': 0.60 (0.41 to 0.88)), but not for the majority (82.8%) with two or fewer abnormal vitals ('Direct': 0.81 (0.44 to 1.49), 'Indirect': 0.82 (0.58 to 1.16)).ConclusionsEmergency medicine physician supervision of emergency care non-physician clinicians is independently associated with reduced overall mortality. This benefit appears restricted to the highest risk patients based on abnormal vitals. With over 80% of patients having equivalent mortality outcomes with independent non-physician clinician emergency care, a synergistic model providing variable levels of emergency medicine physician supervision or care based on patient acuity could safely address staffing shortages.