RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Most patients who sustain a traumatic injury require outpatient follow-up. A common barrier to outpatient postadmission care is patient failure to follow-up. One of the most significant factors resulting in failure to follow-up is age more than 35 years. Recent work has shown that follow-up telephone calls reduce readmission rates. Our aim was to decrease no-show appointments by 10% in 12 months. STUDY DESIGN: The electronic medical records at our level I and II trauma centers were queried for all outpatient appointments for trauma between July 1, 2020, and June 9, 2021, and whether the patient attended their follow-up appointment. Patients with visits scheduled after August 1, 2021, received 24- and 48-hour previsit reminder calls. Patients with visits scheduled between July 1, 2020, and August 1, 2021, did not receive previsit calls. Both groups were compared using multivariable direct logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 1,822 follow-up opportunities were included in the study. During the pre-implementation phase, there was a no-show rate of 30.9% (329 of 1,064 visits). Postintervention, a 12.2% reduction in overall no-show rate occurred. A statistically significant 11.2% decrease (p < 0.001) was seen in elderly patients. Multivariate analysis showed standardized calls resulted in significantly decreased odds of failing to keep an appointment (adjusted odds ratio = 0.610, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Reminder calls led to a 12.2% reduction in no-show rate and were an independent predictor of a patient's likelihood of attending their appointment. Other predictors of attendance included insurance status and abdominal injury.
Assuntos
Traumatismos Abdominais , Pacientes não Comparecentes , Humanos , Idoso , Adulto , Cooperação do Paciente , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , Agendamento de ConsultasRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Nationally, the volume of geriatric falls with intracranial hemorrhage is increasing. Our institution began observing patients with intracranial hemorrhage, Glasgow Coma Scale of 14 or greater, and no midline shift or intraventricular hemorrhage with hourly neurologic examinations outside of the ICU in a high observation trauma (HOT) protocol. We first excluded patients on anticoagulants or antiplatelets (HOT I), then included antiplatelets and warfarin (HOT II), and finally, included direct oral anticoagulants (HOT III). Our hypothesis is that HOT protocol safely reduces ICU use and creates cost savings in this patient population. STUDY DESIGN: Our institutional trauma registry was retrospectively queried for all patients on HOT protocol. Patients were stratified based on date of admission (HOT I [2008-2014], HOT II [2015-2018], and HOT III [2019-2021]), and were compared for demographics, anticoagulant use, injury characteristics, lengths of stay, incidence of neurointervention, and mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, 2,343 patients were admitted: 939 stratified to HOT I, 794 to HOT II, and 610 to HOT III. Of these patients, 331 (35%), 554 (70%), and 495 (81%) were admitted to the floor under HOT protocol, respectively. HOT protocol patients required neurointervention in 3.0%, 0.5%, and 0.4% of cases in HOT I, II, and III, respectively. Mortality among HOT protocol patients was found to be 0.6% in HOT I, 0.9% in HOT II, and 0.2% in the HOT III cohort (p = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: Throughout the study period ICU use decreased without an increase in neurosurgical intervention or mortality, indicating the efficacy of the HOT selection criteria in identifying appropriate candidates for stepdown admission and HOT protocol.
Assuntos
Anticoagulantes , Lesões Encefálicas Traumáticas , Humanos , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Varfarina , Lesões Encefálicas Traumáticas/complicações , Lesões Encefálicas Traumáticas/diagnóstico , Lesões Encefálicas Traumáticas/terapia , Hemorragias Intracranianas , Escala de Coma de GlasgowRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify a mortality benefit with the use of whole blood (WB) as part of the resuscitation of bleeding trauma patients. BACKGROUND: Blood component therapy (BCT) is the current standard for resuscitating trauma patients, with WB emerging as the blood product of choice. We hypothesized that the use of WB versus BCT alone would result in decreased mortality. METHODS: We performed a 14-center, prospective observational study of trauma patients who received WB versus BCT during their resuscitation. We applied a generalized linear mixed-effects model with a random effect and controlled for age, sex, mechanism of injury (MOI), and injury severity score. All patients who received blood as part of their initial resuscitation were included. Primary outcome was mortality and secondary outcomes included acute kidney injury, deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, pulmonary complications, and bleeding complications. RESULTS: A total of 1623 [WB: 1180 (74%), BCT: 443(27%)] patients who sustained penetrating (53%) or blunt (47%) injury were included. Patients who received WB had a higher shock index (0.98 vs 0.83), more comorbidities, and more blunt MOI (all P <0.05). After controlling for center, age, sex, MOI, and injury severity score, we found no differences in the rates of acute kidney injury, deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism or pulmonary complications. WB patients were 9% less likely to experience bleeding complications and were 48% less likely to die than BCT patients ( P <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with BCT, the use of WB was associated with a 48% reduction in mortality in trauma patients. Our study supports the use of WB use in the resuscitation of trauma patients.