Search

BACKGROUND: Rib fractures are one of the most common traumatic injuries and may result in significant morbidity and mortality. Despite growing evidence, technological advances and increasing acceptance, surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) remains not uniformly considered in trauma centers. Indications, contraindications, appropriate timing, surgical approaches and utilized implants are part of an ongoing debate. The present position paper, which is endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), and supported by the Chest Wall Injury Society, aims to provide a review of the literature investigating the use of SSRF in rib fracture management to develop graded position statements, providing an updated guide and reference for SSRF. METHODS: This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on the position statements. RESULTS: A total of 287 studies (systematic reviews, randomized clinical trial, prospective and retrospective comparative studies, case series, original articles) have been selected from an initial pool of 9928 studies. Thirty-nine graded position statements were put forward to address eight crucial aspects of SSRF: surgical indications, contraindications, optimal timing of surgery, preoperative imaging evaluation, rib fracture sites for surgical fixation, management of concurrent thoracic injuries, surgical approach, stabilization methods and material selection. CONCLUSION: This consensus document addresses the key focus questions on surgical treatment of rib fractures. The expert recommendations clarify current evidences on SSRF indications, timing, operative planning, approaches and techniques, with the aim to guide clinicians in optimizing the management of rib fractures, to improve patient outcomes and direct future research.

Background: The Rural Trauma Team Development Course (RTTDC) is designed to help rural hospitals better organize and manage trauma patients with limited resources. Although RTTDC is well-established, limited literature exists regarding improvement in the overall objectives for which the course was designed. The aim of this study was to analyze the goals of RTTDC, hypothesizing improvements in course objectives after course completion. Methods: This was a prospective, observational study from 2015 through 2021. All hospitals completing the RTTDC led by our Level 1, academic trauma hospital were included. Our institutional database was queried for individual patient data. Cohorts were delineated before and after RTTDC was provided to the rural hospital. Basic demographics were obtained. Outcomes of interest included: Emergency Department (ED) dwell time, decision time to transfer, number of total images/computed tomography scans obtained, and mortality. Chi square and non-parametric median test were used. Significance was set at P <.05. Results: Sixteen rural hospitals were included with a total of 472 patients transferred (240 before and 232 after). Patient demographics were similar before and after RTTDC. ED dwell time was significantly reduced by 64 min (P =.003) and decision to transfer time was cut by 62 min (P =.004) after RTTDC. Mean total radiographic images and CT scans were significantly reduced (P <.001 and P =.002, respectively) after RTTDC. Mortality was unaffected by RTTDC completion (P =.941). Conclusion: The RTTDC demonstrates decreased ED dwell time, decision time to transfer, and number of radiographic images obtained prior to transfer. More rural hospitals should be offered this course. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]