Search

Copyright of Saudi Medical Journal is the property of Saudi Medical Journal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introduction: Traumatic haemorrhagic shock can be difficult to diagnose. Models for predicting critical bleeding and massive transfusion have been developed to aid clinicians. The aim of this review is to outline the various available models and report on their performance and validation. Methods: A review of the English and non-English literature in Medline, PubMed and Google Scholar was conducted from 1990 to September 2015. We combined several terms for i) haemorrhage AND ii) prediction, in the setting of iii) trauma. We included models that had at least two data points. We extracted information about the models, their developments, performance and validation. Results: There were 36 different models identified that diagnose critical bleeding, which included a total of 36 unique variables. All models were developed retrospectively. The models performed with variable predictive abilities-the most superior with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.985, but included detailed findings on imaging and was based on a small cohort. The most commonly included variable was systolic blood pressure, featuring in all but five models. Pattern or mechanism of injury were used by 16 models. Pathology results were used by 15 models, of which nine included base deficit and eight models included haemoglobin. Imaging was utilised in eight models. Thirteen models were known to be validated, with only one being prospectively validated. Conclusions: Several models for predicting critical bleeding exist, however none were deemed accurate enough to dictate treatment. Potential areas of improvement identified include measures of variability in vital signs and point of care imaging and pathology testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objectives of the present study were to report the proportion of older teenagers, including the subgroup operating a motor vehicle, presenting to an adult major trauma centre after injury with a positive blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over a 12‐year period. Methods: This was a registry‐based cohort study, including all patients aged 16–19 years presenting to an adult major trauma centre in Victoria, Australia from January 2008 to December 2019 and included in the trauma registry. A Poisson regression model was used to test for change in incidence of positive BAC associated trauma and summarised using incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: There were 1658 patients included for analysis and alcohol was detected in 368 (22.2%; 95% CI 20.2–24.3). Most alcohol positive presentations were on weekend days (n = 207; 56.3%) and most were males (n = 307). Over the 12‐year period, there was a reduction in the incidence of older teenagers presenting with a positive BAC (IRR 0.95; 95% CI 0.93–0.98; P = 0.001). Among patients presenting after trauma in the setting of operating a motor vehicle (n = 545), alcohol was detected in 80 (14.7%) with no significant change in incidence of positive BAC (IRR 0.95; 95% CI 0.89–1.02; P = 0.17). Conclusions: A substantial proportion of older teenagers included in the registry had alcohol exposure prior to trauma. Despite a modest down‐trending incidence, the need for continuing preventive measures is emphasised. In particular, preventive efforts should be targeted at male, older teenagers undertaking drinking activities on weekend days and driving motor vehicles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: After trauma, clearance of the cervical spine refers to the exclusion of underlying serious injuries. Accurate assessment of computed tomography (CT) is commonly required prior to clearance of the cervical spine. Delays to clearance can lead to prolonged immobilization with associated patient discomfort and adverse effects. This systematic review aimed to determine performance of non‐radiologists to evaluate cervical spine CT. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library with sources of grey literature and reference lists of selected articles were appraised from inception to April 2021. We included manuscripts that reported discordance in CT cervical spine interpretation between non‐radiologists and radiologists. The Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to assess quality of included studies and statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Results: There were 43 studies identified for eligibility and 4 manuscripts included in the final analysis. There were two studies that reported on the performance of radiology residents, one study on the performance of surgical residents and one on emergency physicians. The pooled discordance was 0.25 (95%CI 0.21–0.28) but was lower for radiology residents (range 0.007–0.05). There was significant statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 99.6%, P < 0.001) among studies. Conclusion: There is a paucity of evidence documenting the ability of non‐radiologists in accurately interpreting CT of the cervical spine. A number of discordant findings suggest that studies with larger sample sizes are indicated to accurately ascertain the ability of non‐radiologists in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Inconsistency in the structure and function of team-based major trauma reception and resuscitation is common. A standardised trauma team training programme was initiated to improve quality and consistency among trauma teams across a large, mature trauma system. The aim of this manuscript is to outline the programme and report on the initial perception of participants. Methods: The Alfred Trauma Team Reception and Resuscitation Training (TTRRT) programme commenced in March 2019. Participants included critical care and surgical craft group members commonly involved in trauma teams. Training was sitespecific and included rural, urban and tertiary referral centres. The programme consisted of prescribed pre-learning, didactic lectures, skill stations and simulated team-based scenarios. Participant perceptions of the programme were collected before and after the programme for analysis. Results: The TTRRT was delivered to 252 participants and 120 responses were received. Significant improvement in participant-reported confidence was identified across all key topic areas. There was also a significant increase in both confidence and clinical exposure to trauma team leadership roles after participation in the programme (from 53 [44.2%] to 74 [61.7%; P = 0.007]). This finding was independent of clinician experience. Conclusions: A team-based trauma reception and resuscitation education programme, introduced in a large, mature trauma system led to positive participant-reported outcomes in clinical confidence and real-life team leadership participation. Wider implementation combined with longitudinal data collection will facilitate correlation with patient and staff-centred outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Haemorrhagic shock after trauma is a leading cause of death worldwide, particularly in young individuals. Despite advances in trauma systems and resuscitation strategies, mortality from haemorrhagic shock has not declined over the previous two decades. A proportion of shocked trauma patients may experience a deficiency of cortisol relative to the severity of their injury. The benefit of exogenous steroid administration in patients suffering haemorrhagic shock as a result of injury is unclear. A systematic review of four databases (Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Cochrane, Scopus) was undertaken. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were pre-determined and two reviewers independently screened the articles with disagreements arbitrated by a third reviewer. The primary outcome variable was 28-day mortality. Quality of studies were assessed using the Cochrane-risk-of-bias (RoB 2) tool. Of the 2919 studies yielded by the search strategy, 1274 duplicates were removed and 1645 screened on title and abstract. After the full text of 33 studies were assessed, two articles were included. Both studies were over 30 years old with small numbers of participants and with primary outcomes not including mortality. Of the data available, no statistically significant difference in mortality was detected. Hospital length of stay, reversal of shock or adverse events were not reported. Both studies were at risk of bias. There are no high quality or recent studies in the English literature investigating the use of steroids for haemorrhagic shocked trauma patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]