Search

Background Spinal motion restriction (SMR) after traumatic injury has been a mainstay of prehospital trauma care for more than 3 decades. Recent guidelines recommend a selective approach with cervical spine clearance in the field when criteria are met. Materials and methods In January 2014, the Department of Health Services of the City of Los Angeles, California, implemented revised guidelines for cervical SMR after blunt mechanism trauma. Adult patients (aged ≥18 y) with an initial Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of ≥13 presented to a single level I trauma center after blunt mechanism trauma over the following 1-y period were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, injury data, and prehospital data were collected. Cervical spine injury (CSI) was identified by International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, codes. Results Emergency medical services transported 1111 patients to the emergency department who sustained blunt trauma. Patients were excluded if they refused c-collar placement or if documentation was incomplete. A total of 997 patients were included in our analysis with 172 (17.2%) who were selective cleared of SMR per protocol. The rate of Spinal Cord Injury was 2.2% (22/997) overall and 1.2% (2/172) in patients without SMR. The sensitivity and specificity of the protocol are 90.9% (95% confidence interval: 69.4-98.4) and 17.4% (95% confidence interval: 15.1-20.0), respectively, for CSI. Patients with CSI who arrived without immobilization having met field clearance guidelines, were managed without intervention, and had no neurologic compromise. Conclusions Guidelines for cervical SMR have high sensitivity and low specificity to identify CSI. When patients with injuries were not placed on motion restrictions, there were no negative clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Although it is assumed that obese patients are naturally protected against anterior abdominal stab wounds, the relationship has never been formally studied. We sought to examine the impact of body mass index (BMI) on severity of sustained injury, need for operation, and patient outcomes. Materials and methods We conducted a review of all patients presenting with abdominal stab wounds at an urban level I trauma center from January 2000-December 2012. Patients were divided into groups based on their BMI (<18.5, 18.5-29.9, 30-35, and >35). Data abstracted included baseline demographics, physiologic data, and characterization of whether the stab wound had violated the peritoneum, caused intra-abdominal injury, or required an operation that was therapeutic. The one-sided Cochran-Armitage trend test was used for significance testing of the protective effect. Results Of 281 patients with abdominal stab wounds, 249 had complete data for evaluation. Chest and abdomen abbreviated injury scale trends decreased with increasing BMI, as did overall injury severity score, the percent of patients severely injured (injury severity score ≥25), and length of intensive care unit stay. Rates of peritoneal violation (100%, 84%, 77%, and 74%; P = 0.077), visceral injury (83%, 56%, 50%, and 30%; P = 0.022), and injury requiring a therapeutic operation (67%, 45%, 40%, and 20%; P = 0.034) all decreased with increasing BMI. Patients in the thinnest group required an operation three times more often than those in the most obese. Conclusions Increased BMI protects patients with abdominal stab wounds and is associated with lower incidence of severe injury and need for operation. Heavier patients may be more suitable to observation and serial examinations, whereas very thin patients are more likely to require an operation and be critically injured. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]