Search

Introduction: Traditional vital signs are seen as an important part of trauma assessment, despite their poor predictive value in this regard., Objective: This study evaluated whether the difference between systolic blood pressure (SBP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR) and shock index (SI) taken in the emergency department (ED) and prehospital can predict 48 h mortality postadmission following trauma., Methods: Retrospective cohort was obtained from the Trauma Audit and Research Network. Subjects were excluded if head or spinal injuries, prehospital intubation or CPR were present. Main outcome was 48 h mortality. The difference (delta, Δ) between ED and prehospital values were used as study variables (ie, ΔSI=SI-ED minus SI-prehospital). Accuracy was assessed using area under receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). AUROC coordinates were used to identify 95% specificity cut points and described further using sensitivity and likelihood ratios (LRs)., Results: Significant AUROC statistics were revealed for ΔSBP (0.57) and ΔRR (0.56) for the full sample, ΔSBP (0.62) and ΔSI (0.65) for moderate, and ΔRR (0.6) for severe injury. Best LRs were 3.4 and 2.4 for ΔRR and ΔSI, respectively, but sensitivities were low (<=26%). Cut point values for ΔSBP, ΔRR and ΔSI were 37 mm Hg, 8 breaths/min and 0.2, respectively., Discussion: ΔSBP and ΔRR performed best overall, but ΔSI performed best in the moderate injury group, suggesting earlier identification with ΔSI. Use of Δ values result in good rule-in of 48 h mortality and may supplement trauma treatment decisions., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background: Raised blood pressure (and heart rate (HR)) due to anxiety in a clinical situation is well described and is called the white coat effect (WCE). It is not known whether the pain and anxiety that results from trauma causes a measurable WCE., Methods: A sample of patients with a non-haemorrhagic injury from the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) was compared with a healthy, non-injury sample from the Health Survey for England (HSE) databases. Two-way analysis of variance with rank transformation of data was used to compare systolic blood pressure (SBP) and HR between the groups at different ages. In the injured group, the SBP and HR were also compared between spinally immobilised and non-immobilised patients., Results: There was a statistically significant difference between the groups for both HR and SBP (p<0.001). Median HR remained approximately 10 bpm higher in the TARN set when compared to the HSE set, irrespective of age. The difference for SBP was not considered clinically relevant (the highest was 5 mm Hg). There was no significant difference between immobilised and non-immobilised patients, for either HR or SBP (p=0.07 and 0.3, respectively)., Discussion: Median HR remained approximately 10 bpm higher in the TARN (injury) set compared to the HSE (non-injury, control) set, irrespective of age. Understanding that HR reacts in this way for mild to moderately injured patients is important as it will affect clinical interpretation during the initial assessment.

Payment by results is a new funding mechanism being introduced into the National Health Service. It is a key part of current health reforms and will impact significantly on the way emergency departments are financed and run. This paper aims to describe the basics of payment by results, examines how it relates to and impacts upon emergency medicine, and considers how emergency physicians can set about integrating this new system into current practice and thinking.