Search

Objective: The longer-term impact of injury is increasingly recognized, but the early phases of recovery are less well understood. The best tools to measure early recovery of mobility and physical function following traumatic injury are unclear. The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical utility, validity, reliability, and responsiveness of 4 mobility and physical function measures in patients following traumatic injury. Methods: In this cohort, measurement-focused study (n = 100), the modified Iowa Level of Assistance Score, Acute Care Index of Function, Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care "6 Clicks" short forms, and Functional Independence Measure were completed during first and last physical therapy sessions. Clinical utility and floor and ceiling effects were documented. Known-groups validity (early vs late in admission and by discharge destination), predictive validity (using 6-month postinjury outcomes data), and responsiveness were established. Interrater reliability was assessed in 30 patients with stable mobility and function. Results: Participants had a median age of 52 years (interquartile range = 33–68 years), and 68% were male. The modified Iowa Level of Assistance Score, Acute Care Index of Function, and "6 Clicks" short forms were quick to administer (an extra median time of 30 seconds–1 minute), but the Functional Independence Measure took much longer (extra median time of 5 minutes). At the last physical therapy session, ceiling effects were present for all measures except the Functional Independence Measure (18%–33% of participants). All had strong known-groups validity (early vs late in admission and by discharge destination). All were responsive (effect sizes >1.0) and had excellent interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.79–0.94). Conclusion: All 4 measures were reliable, valid, and responsive; however, their clinical utility varied, and ceiling effects were common at physical therapy discharge. Impact: This study is an important step toward evidence-based measurement in acute trauma physical therapy care. It provides critical information to guide assessment of mobility and physical function in acute trauma physical therapy, which may facilitate benchmarking across different hospitals and trauma centers and further progress the science and practice of physical therapy following traumatic injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objective of this study was to report the procedural incidence and patient outcomes after the 2009 introduction of an institutional resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) programme. Emergency physicians, general surgeons and emergency nursing trauma team members were trained to perform RT on thoracic trauma patients with an unresponsive systolic blood pressure (SBP) <70 mmHg within 30 min of arrival, prior to cardiothoracic team back‐up. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients who underwent RT from 2009 to 2017. The primary outcome measures were the incidence of the procedure and patients' survival to hospital discharge. Variables associated with survival were assessed using univariable logistic regression analyses. Results: There were 12 399 major trauma patients, including 7657 with major thoracic trauma and 315 presenting with SBP <70 mmHg. There were 32 RTs performed (incidence of 0.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.3–0.6) among patients with major thoracic trauma and 10.2% (99% CI 7.3–13.4) among patients with major thoracic trauma and SBP <70 mmHg. There were eight (25%; 95% CI 13.2–42.1) survivors to hospital discharge and no late mortality (mean follow‐up 2.8 years). Survival was significantly associated with the procedure performed within 30 min of arrival (odds ratio 0.09; 95% CI 0.01–0.67) while mortality was associated with the procedure being performed in the setting of traumatic cardiac arrest (odds ratio 18.3; 95% CI 2.4–140.4). Conclusions: A formal training and credentialing programme was associated with a low incidence of the procedure, yet achieved a survival rate of 25%, which is comparable to other reported literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]