Search

Background: Multiple clinical practice guidelines recommend minimizing radiation in trauma patients but there is a knowledge gap on the importance of this problem for trauma transfers. We aimed to estimate the incidence of pretransfer and repeat posttransfer computed tomography (CT) overall and in patients with an indication for immediate transfer, to assess interhospital practice variation, to identify predictors, and to quantify the influence of pretransfer CT on time to transfer. Methods We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study on patients transferred to major trauma centers from 2013 to 2019. Multilevel generalized linear regression was used to generate intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) to assess interhospital variation, multilevel logistic regression to generate odds ratios for each predictor, and geometric mean ratios to quantify the influence of CT on time to transfer. Results Of 18,244 patients included, 8501 (47%) had a pretransfer CT and one‐quarter (26%) had a repeat posttransfer CT. Interhospital variation was moderate for pretransfer CT (5%–66%, ICC 12.5%) and for repeat posttransfer CT (7%–44%, ICC 14.7%). Pretransfer imaging was more frequent in elders and in males and repeat posttransfer imaging decreased over the study period but was more frequent in patients transferred in from Level III/IV centers than nondesignated hospitals. Time to transfer was doubled in patients who had a pretransfer CT. Conclusions: Results suggest that pretransfer CT and repeat posttransfer CT are frequent and are subject to significant practice variation. In addition, pretransfer CT is associated with increased times to transfer though additional studies are needed to demonstrate causation. These results highlight potential opportunities to reduce low‐value imaging for trauma transfers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text Objective: Evaluate interhospital variation in resource use for in-hospital injury deaths. Background: Significant variation in resource use for end-of-life care has been observed in the US for chronic diseases. However, there is an important knowledge gap on end-of-life resource use for trauma patients. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of injury deaths following hospitalization in any of the 57 trauma centers in a Canadian trauma system (2013–2016). Resource use intensity was measured using activity-based costing (2016 $CAN) according to time of death (72 h, 3–14 d, ≥14 d). We used multilevel log-linear regression to model resource use and estimated interhospital variation using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Results: Our study population comprised 2044 injury deaths. Variation in resource use between hospitals was observed for all 3 time frames (ICC = 6.5%, 6.6%, and 5.9% for < 72 h, 3–14 d, and ≥14 d, respectively). Interhospital variation was stronger for allied health services (ICC = 18 to 26%), medical imaging (ICC = 4 to 10%), and the ICU (ICC = 5 to 6%) than other activity centers. We observed stronger interhospital variation for patients < 65 years of age (ICC = 11 to 34%) than those ≥65 (ICC = 5 to 6%) and for traumatic brain injury (ICC = 5 to 13%) than other injuries (ICC = 1 to 8%). Conclusions: We observed variation in resource use intensity for injury deaths across trauma centers. Strongest variation was observed for younger patients and those with traumatic brain injury. Results may reflect variation in level of care decisions and the incidence of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Injuries represent one of the leading causes of preventable morbidity and mortality. For countries with ageing populations, admissions of injured older patients are increasing exponentially. Yet, we know little about hospital resource use for injured older patients. Our primary objective was to evaluate inter-hospital variation in the risk-adjusted resource use for injured older patients. Secondary objectives were to identify the determinants of resource use and evaluate its association with clinical outcomes. Methods We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of injured older patients (≥65 years) admitted to any trauma centres in the province of Quebec (2013–2016, N  = 33,184). Resource use was estimated using activity-based costing and modelled with multilevel linear models. We conducted separate subgroup analyses for patients with trauma and fragility fractures. Results Risk-adjusted resource use varied significantly across trauma centres, more for older patients with fragility fractures (intra-class correlation coefficients [ICC] = 0.093, 95% CI [0.079, 0.102]) than with trauma (ICC = 0.047, 95% CI = 0.035–0.051). Risk-adjusted resource use increased with age, and the number of comorbidities, and varied with discharge destination (P  < 0.001). Higher hospital resource use was associated with higher incidence of complications for trauma (Pearson correlation coefficient r  = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.3–0.7) and fragility fractures (r  = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.3–0.7) and with higher mortality for fragility fractures (r  = 0.4, 95% CI = 0.2–0.6). Conclusions We observed significant inter-hospital variations in resource use for injured older patients. Hospitals with higher resource use did not have better clinical outcomes. Hospital resource use may not always positively impact patient care and outcomes. Future studies should evaluate mechanisms, by which hospital resource use impacts care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the variation in hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) for injury admissions across Canadian provinces and to evaluate the relative contribution of patient case mix and treatment-related factors (intensity of care, complications, and discharge delays) to explaining observed variations. Background: Identifying unjustified interprovider variations in resource use and the determinants of such variations is an important step towards optimizing health care. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study on admissions for major trauma (injury severity score >12) to level I and II trauma centers across Canada (2006-2012). We used data from the Canadian National Trauma Registry linked to hospital discharge data to compare risk-adjusted hospital and ICU LOS across provinces. Results: Risk-adjusted hospital LOS was shortest in Ontario (10.0 days) and longest in Newfoundland and Labrador (16.1 days; P < 0.001). Risk-adjusted ICU LOS was shortest in Québec (4.4 days) and longest in Alberta (6.1 days; P < 0.001). Patient case-mix explained 32% and 8% of interhospital variations in hospital and ICU LOS, respectively, whereas treatment-related factors explained 63% and 22%. Conclusions: We observed significant variation in risk-adjusted hospital and ICU LOS across trauma systems in Canada. Provider ranks on hospital LOS were not related to those observed for ICU LOS. Treatment-related factors explained more interhospital variation in LOS than patient case-mix. Results suggest that interventions targeting reductions in low-value procedures, prevention of adverse events, and better discharge planning may be most effective for optimizing LOS for injury admissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To measure the variation in trauma center mortality across Canadian trauma systems, assess the contribution of traumatic brain injury and thoracoabdominal injury to observed variations, and evaluate whether the presence of recommended trauma system components is associated with mortality. Summary Background Data: Injuries represent one of the leading causes of mortality, disability, and health care costs worldwide. Trauma systems have improved injury outcomes, but the impact of trauma system configuration on mortality is unknown. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults admitted for major injury to trauma centers across Canada (2006–2012). Multilevel logistic regression was used to estimate risk-adjusted hospital mortality and assess the impact of 13 recommended trauma system components. Results: Of 78,807 patients, 8382 (10.6%) died in hospital including 6516 (78%) after severe traumatic brain injury and 749 (9%) after severe thoracoabdominal injury. Risk-adjusted mortality varied from 7.0% to 14.2% across provinces (P < 0.0001); 11.1% to 26.0% for severe traumatic brain injury (P < 0.0001), and 4.7% to 5.9% for thoracoabdominal injury (P = 0.2). Mortality decreased with increasing number of recommended trauma system elements; adjusted odds ratio = 0.93 (0.87–0.99). Conclusions: We observed significant variation in trauma center mortality across Canadian provinces, specifically for severe traumatic brain injury. Provinces with more recommended trauma system components had better patient survival. Results suggest that trauma system configuration may be an important determinant of injury mortality. A better understanding of which system processes drive optimal outcomes is required to reduce the burden of injury worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Injury is second only to cardiovascular disease in terms of acute care costs in North America. One key to improving injury care efficiency is to generate knowledge on the determinants of resource use. Socio-economic status (SES) is a documented risk factor for injury severity and mortality but its impact on length of stay (LOS) for injury admissions is unknown. This study aimed to examine the relationship between SES and LOS following injury. This multicenter retrospective cohort study was based on adults discharged alive from any trauma center (2007-2012; 57 hospitals; 65,486 patients) in a Canadian integrated provincial trauma system. SES was determined using ecological indices of material and social deprivation. Mean differences in LOS adjusted for age, gender, comorbidities, and injury severity were generated using multivariate linear regression. Results: Mean LOS was 13.5 days. Patients in the highest quintile of material/social deprivation had a mean LOS 0.5 days (95 % CI 0.1-0.9)/1.4 days (1.1-1.8) longer than those in the lowest quintile. Patients in the highest quintiles of both social and material deprivation had a mean LOS 2.6 days (1.8-3.5) longer than those in the lowest quintiles. Conclusions: Results suggest that patients admitted for traumatic injury who suffer from high social and/or material deprivation have longer acute care LOS in a universal-access health care system. The reasons behind observed differences need to be further explored but may indicate that discharge planning should take patient SES into consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Low-value clinical practices have been identified as one of the most important areas of excess healthcare spending. Nevertheless, there is a knowledge gap on the scale of this problem in injury care. We aimed to identify clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations pertaining to low-value injury care, estimate how frequently they are used in practice, and evaluate interhospital variations in their use.Methods: We identified low-value clinical practices from internationally recognized CPGs. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from a Canadian trauma system (2014-2019) to calculate frequencies and assess interhospital variations.Results: We identified 29 low-value practices. Fourteen could be measured using trauma registry data. The 3 low-value clinical practices with the highest absolute and relative frequencies were computed tomography (CT) in adults with minor head injury (n = 5591, 24%), cervical spine CT (n = 2742, 31%), and whole-body CT in minor or single-system trauma (n = 530, 32%). We observed high interhospital variation for decompressive craniectomy in diffuse traumatic brain injury. Frequencies and interhospital variations were low for magnetic resonance imaging, intracranial pressure monitoring, inferior vena cava filter use, and surgical management of blunt abdominal injuries.Conclusions: We observed evidence of poor adherence to CPG recommendations on low-value CT imaging and high practice variation for decompressive craniectomy. Results suggest that adherence to recommendations for the 10 other low-value practices is high. These data can be used to advance the research agenda on low-value injury care and inform the development of interventions targeting reductions in healthcare overuse in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]