Search

Background and Importance: This study compared the on-scene Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and the GCS-motor (GCS-M) for predictive accuracy of mortality and severe disability using a large, multicenter population of trauma patients in Asian countries., Objective: To compare the ability of the prehospital GCS and GCS-M to predict 30-day mortality and severe disability in trauma patients., Design: We used the Pan-Asia Trauma Outcomes Study registry to enroll all trauma patients >18 years of age who presented to hospitals via emergency medical services from 1 January 2016 to November 30, 2018., Settings and Participants: A total of 16,218 patients were included in the analysis of 30-day mortality and 11 653 patients in the analysis of functional outcomes., Outcome Measures and Analysis: The primary outcome was 30-day mortality after injury, and the secondary outcome was severe disability at discharge defined as a Modified Rankin Scale (MRS) score ≥4. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCs) were compared between GCS and GCS-M for these outcomes. Patients with and without traumatic brain injury (TBI) were analyzed separately. The predictive discrimination ability of logistic regression models for outcomes (30-day mortality and MRS) between GCS and GCS-M is illustrated using AUROCs., Main Results: The primary outcome for 30-day mortality was 1.04% and the AUROCs and 95% confidence intervals for prediction were GCS: 0.917 (0.887-0.946) vs. GCS-M:0.907 (0.875-0.938), P  = 0.155. The secondary outcome for poor functional outcome (MRS ≥ 4) was 12.4% and the AUROCs and 95% confidence intervals for prediction were GCS: 0.617 (0.597-0.637) vs. GCS-M: 0.613 (0.593-0.633), P  = 0.616. The subgroup analyses of patients with and without TBI demonstrated consistent discrimination ability between the GCS and GCS-M. The AUROC values of the GCS vs. GCS-M models for 30-day mortality and poor functional outcome were 0.92 (0.821-1.0) vs. 0.92 (0.824-1.0) ( P  = 0.64) and 0.75 (0.72-0.78) vs. 0.74 (0.717-0.758) ( P  = 0.21), respectively., Conclusion: In the prehospital setting, on-scene GCS-M was comparable to GCS in predicting 30-day mortality and poor functional outcomes among patients with trauma, whether or not there was a TBI., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Injury is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in children. However, the epidemiology and prehospital care for pediatric unintentional injuries in Asia are still unclear., Methods: A total of 9,737 pediatric patients aged <18 years with unintentional injuries cared for at participating centers of the Pan-Asian Trauma Outcome Study (PATOS) from October 2015 to December 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups: those <8 and those ≥8 years of age. Variables such as patient demographics, injury epidemiology, Injury Severity Score (ISS), and prehospital care were collected. Injury severity and administered prehospital care stratified by gross national income were also analyzed., Results: Pediatric unintentional injuries accounted for 9.4% of EMS-transported trauma cases in the participating Asian centers, and the mortality rate was 0.88%. The leading cause of injury was traffic injuries in older children aged ≥8 years (56.5%), while falls at home were common among young children aged <8 years (43.9%). Compared with younger children, older children with similar ISS tended to receive more prehospital interventions. Uneven disease severity was found in that older children in lower-middle and upper-middle-income countries had higher ISS compared with those in high-income countries. The performance of prehospital interventions also differed among countries with different gross national incomes. Immobilizations were the most performed prehospital intervention followed by oxygen administration, airway management, and pain control; only one patient received prehospital thoracentesis. Procedures were performed more frequently in high-income countries than in upper-middle-income and lower-middle-income countries., Conclusions: The major cause of injury was road traffic injuries in older children, while falls at home were common among young children. Prehospital care in pediatric unintentional injuries in Asian countries was not standardized and might be insufficient, and the economic status of countries may affect the implementation of prehospital care.

Background: Termination-of-resuscitation rules (TORRs) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients have been applied in western countries; in Asia, two TORRs were developed and have not been externally validated widely. We aimed to externally validate the TORRs using the registry of Pan-Asian Resuscitation Outcomes Study (PAROS)., Methods: PAROS enrolled 66,780 OHCA patients in seven Asian countries from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2012. The American Heart Association-Basic Life Support and AHA-ALS (AHA-BLS), AHA-Advanced Life Support (AHA-ALS), Goto, and Shibahashi TORRs were selected. The diagnostic test characteristics and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated. We further determined the most suitable TORR in Asia and analysed the variable differences between subgroups., Results: We included 55,064 patients in the final analysis. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and AUC, respectively, for AHA-BLS, AHA-ALS, Goto, Shibashi TORRs were 79.0%, 80.0%, 19.6%, 98.5%, and 0.80; 48.6%, 88.3%, 9.8%, 98.5%, and 0.60; 53.8%, 91.4%, 11.2%, 99.0%, and 0.73; and 35.0%, 94.2%, 8.4%, 99.0%, and 0.65. In countries using the Goto TORR with PPV<99%, OHCA patients were younger, had more males, a higher rate of shockable rhythm, witnessed collapse, pre-hospital defibrillation, and survival to discharge, compared with countries using the Goto TORR with PPV ≥99%., Conclusions: There was no single TORR fit for all Asian countries. The Goto TORR can be considered the most suitable; however, a high predictive performance with PPV ≥99% was not achieved in three countries using it (Korea, Malaysia, and Taiwan)., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Prehospital fluid resuscitation with crystalloids in patients following trauma remain controversial. This study aimed to investigate the association between prehospital fluid resuscitation and outcomes of trauma patients in Asia. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of trauma patients between 2016 and 2018 using data from the Pan-Asia Trauma Outcomes Study (PATOS) database. Prehospital fluid resuscitation was defined as any administration of intravenous crystalloid fluid on the ambulance before arrival to hospitals. The outcomes were in-hospital mortality and poor functional outcomes, defined as Modified Rankin Scale ≥ 4. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to equalize potential prognostic factors in both groups. This study included 31,735 patients from six countries in Asia, and 4318 (13.6%) patients had ever received prehospital fluid resuscitation. The patients receiving prehospital fluid resuscitation had a higher risk of in-hospital mortality, with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-3.10, p = 0.001 in PSM analysis. Prehospital fluid resuscitation was also associated with poor functional outcomes, with an OR 1.73, 95% CI: 1.48-2.03, p < 0.001 in PSM analysis. Prehospital fluid resuscitation in patients with major trauma (injury severity score ≥ 16) presented a higher risk of poor functional outcomes (aOR = 2.65, 95% CI: 1.89-3.73 in PSM analysis, p interaction  = 0.006) via subgroup analysis. Prehospital fluid resuscitation of trauma patients is associated with higher in-hospital mortality and poor functional outcomes in the subgroup in countries studied., (© 2022. The Author(s).)