Search

Limited evidence regarding multiple casualty outcomes exists. Given resource strain with increasing patient load, we hypothesized that patients involved in a multiple casualty incident have worse outcomes compared to standard trauma patients. Multiple casualty victims from 2006 to 2021 at our institution were identified; admission data and trauma outcomes were then compared to standard trauma patients. Chi-square tests and Mann-Whitney U -tests were performed for categorical and non-normal continuous data, respectively. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate associations with mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. We identified 39,924 patients, of which 612 were multiple casualty patients (1.5%). Multiple casualty involvement was associated with younger age (29 y versus 44 y, P < 0.001) and higher rates of penetrating trauma (26.1% versus 21.4%; P < 0.001). Multiple casualty involvement was associated with higher injury severity score (ISS) (11.6 versus 7.9, P < 0.001), mortality (2.4% versus 1.5% P < 0.005), and ICU admission (17% versus 13%, P < 0.005). On logistic regression analysis, age, ISS, shock index, presence of the COVID-19 pandemic, and mechanism all independently predicted mortality (P ≤ 0.003), while multiple casualty involvement did not (P = 0.302). Although multiple casualty incidents are associated with patient factors that increase hospital resource strain, when controlling for age, ISS, shock index, presence of the COVID-19 pandemic, and trauma mechanism, involvement in multiple casualty incident was not independently associated with ICU admission or mortality. Improved understanding of the impact of high-volume trauma may allow us to improve our care of this at-risk population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Because trauma patients in class II shock (blood loss of 15%-30% of total blood volume) arrive normotensive, this makes the identification of shock and subsequent prognostication of outcomes challenging. Our aim was to identify early predictive factors associated with worse outcomes in normotensive patients following penetrating trauma. We hypothesize that abnormalities in initial vital signs portend worse outcomes in normotensive patients following penetrating trauma. A retrospective review was performed from 2006 to 2021 using our trauma database and included trauma patients presenting with penetrating trauma with initial normotensive blood pressures (systolic blood pressure ≥90 mmHg). We compared those with a narrow pulse pressure (NPP ≤25% of systolic blood pressure), tachycardia (heart rate ≥100 beats per minute), and elevated shock index (SI ≥ 0.8) to those without. Outcomes included mortality, intensive care unit admission, and ventilator use. Chi-squared, Mann–Whitney tests, and regression analyses were performed as appropriate. We identified 7618 patients with penetrating injuries and normotension on initial trauma bay assessment. On univariate analysis, NPP, tachycardia, and elevated SI were associated with increases in mortality compared to those without. On multivariable logistic regression, only NPP and tachycardia were independently associated with mortality. Tachycardia and an elevated SI were both independently associated with intensive care unit admission. Only an elevated SI had an independent association with ventilator requirements, while an NPP and tachycardia did not. Immediate trauma bay NPP and tachycardia are independently associated with mortality and adverse outcomes and may provide an opportunity for improved prognostication in normotensive patients following penetrating trauma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]