Search

Thirty-four per cent of deaths among Americans aged 1–46 are due to injury, and many of these deaths could be prevented if all hospitals performed as well as the highest-performing hospitals. The Institute of Medicine and the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine have called for learning health systems, with emphasis on clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) as a means of limiting preventable deaths. Reduction in mortality has been demonstrated when evidence-based trauma CPGs are adhered to; however, guidelines are variably updated, redundant, absent, inaccessible, or perceived as irrelevant. Ultimately, these barriers result in poor guideline implementation and preventable patient deaths. This multidisciplinary group of injury providers, clinical guidance developers and end users, public health and health policy experts and implementation scientists propose key areas for consideration in the definition of an ideal future state for clinical guidance development and dissemination. Suggestions include (1): professional societies collaborate rather than compete for guideline development.(2) Design primary clinical research for implementation, and where relevant, with guideline development in mind.(3) Select clinical topics for guideline development through systematic prioritization, with an emphasis on patient-centered outcomes.(4) Develop guideline authorship groups with a focus on transparency, equity of opportunity and diversity of representation.(5) Establish a plan for regular review and updating and provide the date the guideline was last updated for transparency.(6) Integrate options for adapting the guideline to local resources and needs at the time of development.(7) Make guidelines available on a platform that allows for open feedback and utilization tracking.(8) Improve discoverability of guidelines.(9) Optimize user-experience with a focus on inclusion of bedside-ready, mobile-friendly infographics, tables or algorithms when feasible.(10) Use open access and open licenses.(11) Disseminate clinical guidance via comprehensive and equitable communication channels. Guidelines are key to improve patient outcomes. The proposed focus to ensure trauma guidelines are equitably and effectively developed and disseminated globally.

Background In June 2021, the Injury Research Engagement Project (I-REP) was established. In 2022, we preformed focus group analysis with patients/caregiver and researchers that resulted in themes in preferences, motivations, and best practices to increase participation in trauma research. The importance of trust and well-established relationships was common across all groups. In this study, we aimed to further evaluate preferences regarding research procedures and outcomes, and develop a panel for sustained patient engagement.Methods We performed a multiphase, mixed methods study to elicit trauma stakeholders’ perspectives regarding aspects of research. Previously published phase 1 involved focus group analysis. Phase 2 vignette-based surveys and phase 3 panel formation are described here. One survey was completed by patients/caregivers, and the second by trauma researchers. We compared the responses using independent t-tests. This was followed by a webinar and development of an I-REP panel of patients/caregivers.Results 60 patients/caregivers and 114 researchers participated in the online surveys, with completion rates of 68% and 69%, respectively. The majority of patients/caregivers were >45 years, female (66.7%), and >3 years out from their or their family member’s injury (68.6%). The majority of the researchers were >35 years and male (56.2%). Participants were asked to gauge their perceptions of different research scenarios. The analysis identified themes emerging across groups. Several survey findings differed from phase 1, including motivations to participate (payment) and consent preferences (timing, approach). Racial and ethnic demographics of the participants were not collected.Conclusions Engaging trauma stakeholders results in research more relevant to patients’ needs and priorities. Qualitative engagement methods that intentionally include a more diverse population and determining the appropriate format for specific questions may lead to results that are be more generalizable. The educational webinar was well received, and several participants opted to serve as I-REP panelists to collaborate with trauma researchers moving forward.Level of evidence IV.

BackgroundDesert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) populations have continued to decline due to infectious and other diseases, predation, and habitat alteration. The potential contribution of minerals and heavy metals to tortoise health and susceptibility to disease remains uncertain.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the results of elemental analysis on trace minerals, macrominerals, and heavy metals in scute keratin, kidney, and liver from ill and dying desert tortoises salvaged for necropsy between 1993 and 2000.MethodsSalvaged tortoises were categorized by size (adult, juvenile), geographic location, and primary disease based on necropsy findings. A subset of tortoises that were injured or killed by vehicular trauma or predation but with no notable pathologic abnormalities was used for comparison with diseased tortoises. The panel of elements was analyzed in scute keratin, kidney, and liver samples by inductively-coupled plasma spectrometry and atomic absorption spectrophotometry.ResultsNecropsies were done on 46 tortoises, including 9 juveniles, salvaged from 5 regions in the Colorado and Mojave Deserts of California. Primary diseases were cutaneous dyskeratosis (n = 9), infection/inflammation (n = 8), malnutrition (n = 7), mycoplasmosis (n = 5), and urolithiasis (n = 3); 14 tortoises died of trauma. Concentrations of elements differed by tissue, size, desert region, and disease status (p

Introduction Engaging trauma survivors/caregivers results in research findings that are more relevant to patients’ needs and priorities. Although their perspectives increase research significance, there is a lack of understanding about how best to incorporate their insights. We aimed to capture stakeholder perspectives to ensure research is meaningful, respectful, and relevant to the injured patient and their caregivers.Methods A multiphase, inductive exploratory qualitative study was performed, the first phase of which is described here. Virtual focus groups to elicit stakeholder perspectives and preferences were conducted across 19 trauma centers in the USA during 2022. Discussion topics were chosen to identify patients’ motivation to join research studies, preferences regarding consent, suggestions for increasing diversity and access, and feelings regarding outcomes, efficacy, and exception from informed consent. The focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed to identify the range of perspectives expressed and any common themes that emerged.Results Ten 90-minute focus groups included patients/caregiver (n=21/1) and researchers (n=14). Data analysis identified common themes emerging across groups. The importance of trust and preexisting relationships with the clinical care team were the most common themes across all groups.Conclusion Our findings reveal common themes in preferences, motivations, and best practices to increase patient/caregiver participation in trauma research. The project’s next phases are distribution of a vignette-based survey to establish broad stakeholder consensus; education and dissemination activities to share strategies that increase research engagement and relevance for patients; and the formation of a panel of patients to support future research endeavors.Level of evidence Level IV.

ObjectivesPharmacological venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is recommended in the vast majority of trauma patients. The purpose of this study was to characterize current dosing practices and timing of initiation of pharmacological VTE chemoprophylaxis at trauma centers.MethodsThis was an international, cross-sectional survey of trauma providers. The survey was sponsored by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) and distributed to AAST members. The survey included 38 questions about practitioner demographics, experience, level and location of trauma center, and individual/site-specific practices regarding the dosing, selection, and timing of initiation of pharmacological VTE chemoprophylaxis in trauma patients.ResultsOne hundred eighteen trauma providers responded (estimated response rate 6.9%). Most respondents were at level 1 trauma centers (100/118; 84.7%) and had >10 years of experience (73/118; 61.9%). While multiple dosing regimens were used, the most common dose reported was enoxaparin 30 mg every 12 hours (80/118; 67.8%). The majority of respondents (88/118; 74.6%) indicated adjusting the dose in patients with obesity. Seventy-eight (66.1%) routinely use antifactor Xa levels to guide dosing. Respondents at academic institutions were more likely to use guideline-directed dosing (based on the Eastern Association of the Surgery of Trauma and the Western Trauma Association guidelines) of VTE chemoprophylaxis compared with those at non-academic centers (86.2% vs 62.5%; p=0.0158) and guideline-directed dosing was reported more often if the trauma team included a clinical pharmacist (88.2% vs 69.0%; p=0.0142). Wide variability in initial timing of VTE chemoprophylaxis after traumatic brain injury, solid organ injury, and spinal cord injuries was found.ConclusionsA high degree of variability exists in prescribing and monitoring practices for the prevention of VTE in trauma patients. Clinical pharmacists may be helpful on trauma teams to optimize dosing and increase prescribing of guideline-concordant VTE chemoprophylaxis.

Introduction Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis implementation strategies are well-studied in some hospitalized medical and surgical patients. Although VTE is associated with substantial mortality and morbidity in trauma patients, implementation strategies for the prevention of VTE in trauma appear to be based on limited evidence. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature on active implementation strategies for VTE prophylaxis administration in hospitalized trauma patients and the impact on VTE events.Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in adult hospitalized trauma patients to assess if active VTE prevention implementation strategies change the proportion of patients who received VTE prophylaxis, VTE events, and adverse effects such as bleeding or heparin-induced thrombocytopenia as well as hospital length of stay and the cost of care. An academic medical librarian searched Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science until December 2022.Results Four studies with a total of 1723 patients in the active implementation strategy group (strategies included education, reminders, human and computer alerts, audit and feedback, preprinted orders, and/or root cause analysis) and 1324 in the no active implementation strategy group (guideline creation and dissemination) were included in the analysis. A higher proportion of patients received VTE prophylaxis with an active implementation strategy (OR=2.94, 95% CI (1.68 to 5.15), p

ObjectivesOur understanding of blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) has changed significantly in recent decades, resulting in a heterogeneous description of diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes in the literature which is not suitable for data pooling. Therefore, we endeavored to develop a core outcome set (COS) to help guide future BCVI research and overcome the challenge of heterogeneous outcomes reporting.MethodsAfter a review of landmark BCVI publications, content experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi study. For round 1, participants submitted a list of proposed core outcomes. In subsequent rounds, panelists used a 9-point Likert scale to score the proposed outcomes for importance. Core outcomes consensus was defined as >70% of scores receiving 7 to 9 and

Mental healthcare disparities are routinely documented, yet they remain wider than in most other areas of healthcare services and common mental disorders (depression and anxiety) continue to be one of the highest health burdens for older people of color. To address disparities in mental health services for older people of color, the narrative must move beyond simply documenting these inequities and attain a better understanding of the internalized, interpersonal, systemic, and medical racism that have harmed these communities and excluded them from its services in the first place. It is imperative that researchers, clinicians, and policymakers acknowledge the realities of racism and discrimination as leading causes of mental healthcare disparities. Therefore, this review is a call-to-action. Authors adopt an antiracist and health equity lens in evaluating the differing needs of Blacks/African-Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos by exploring psychiatric comorbidity, experiences with seeking, accessing, and engaging in treatment, and the unique cultural and psychosocial factors that affect treatment outcomes for these diverse groups. Further, authors offer researchers and practitioners tangible tools for developing and implementing culturally-sensitive, mental health focused interventions for older people of color with special attention placed on cultural adaptations, models of care, prevention, and practical strategies that can be implemented to reduce disparities and increase equity in mental healthcare.

ObjectivesDamage control laparotomy (DCL) remains an important tool in the trauma surgeon's armamentarium. Inconsistency in reporting standards have hindered careful scrutiny of DCL outcomes. We sought to develop a core outcome set (COS) for DCL clinical studies to facilitate future pooling of data via meta-analysis and Bayesian statistics while minimizing reporting bias.MethodsA modified Delphi study was performed using DCL content experts identified through Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) 'landmark' DCL papers and EAST ad hoc COS task force consensus.ResultsOf 28 content experts identified, 20 (71%) participated in round 1, 20/20 (100%) in round 2, and 19/20 (95%) in round 3. Round 1 identified 36 potential COS. Round 2 achieved consensus on 10 core outcomes: mortality, 30-day mortality, fascial closure, days to fascial closure, abdominal complications, major complications requiring reoperation or unplanned re-exploration following closure, gastrointestinal anastomotic leak, secondary intra-abdominal sepsis (including anastomotic leak), enterocutaneous fistula, and 12-month functional outcome. Despite feedback provided between rounds, round 3 achieved no further consensus.ConclusionsThrough an electronic survey-based consensus method, content experts agreed on a core outcome set for damage control laparotomy, which is recommended for future trials in DCL clinical research. Further work is necessary to delineate specific tools and methods for measuring specific outcomes.Level of evidenceV, criteria.

BackgroundThere are substantial racial and socioeconomic disparities underlying endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in the United States. To date, race-based variations in reinterventions following elective EVAR have not been studied. Here, we aim to examine racial disparities associated with reinterventions following elective EVAR in a real-world cohort.Materials and methodsWe used the Vascular Quality Initiative EVAR dataset to identify all patients undergoing elective EVAR between January 2009 and December 2018 in the United States. We compared the association of race with reinterventions after EVAR and all-cause mortality using Welch two-sample t-tests, multivariate logistic regression, and Cox proportional hazards analyses adjusting for baseline differences between groups.ResultsAt median follow-up of 1.1 ± 1.1 y (1.3 ± 1.4 y Black, 1.1 ± 1.1 y White; P = 0.02), a total of 1,164 of 42,481 patients (2.7%) underwent reintervention after elective EVAR, including 2.7% (n = 1,096) White versus 3.2% (n = 68) Black (P = 0.21). Black patients requiring reintervention were more frequently female, more frequently current or former smokers, and less frequently insured by Medicare/Medicaid (P < 0.05). After adjusting for baseline differences, the risk of reintervention after elective EVAR was significantly lower for Black versus White patients (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99; P = 0.04). All-cause mortality was comparable between groups (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.33-2.00, P = 0.65).ConclusionsThere are significant differences between Black and White patients in the risk of reintervention after elective EVAR in the United States. The etiology of this difference deserves investigation.

BackgroundPrehospital procedures (PHP) by emergency medical services (EMS) are performed regularly in penetrating trauma patients despite previous studies demonstrating no benefit. We sought to examine the influence of PHPs on outcomes in penetrating trauma patients in urban locations where transport to trauma center is not prolonged. We hypothesized that patients without PHPs would have better outcomes than those undergoing PHP.MethodsThis was an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma-sponsored, multicenter, prospective, observational trial of adults (18+ years) with penetrating trauma to the torso and/or proximal extremity presenting at 25 urban trauma centers. The impact of PHPs and transport mechanism on in-hospital mortality were examined.ResultsOf 2,284 patients included, 1,386 (60.7%) underwent PHP. The patients were primarily Black (n = 1,527, 66.9%) males (n = 1,986, 87.5%) injured by gunshot wound (n = 1,510, 66.0%) with 34.1% (n = 726) having New Injury Severity Score of ≥16. A total of 1,427 patients (62.5%) were transported by Advanced Life Support EMS, 17.2% (n = 392) by private vehicle, 13.7% (n = 312) by police, and 6.7% (n = 153) by Basic Life Support EMS. Of the PHP patients, 69.1% received PHP on scene, 59.9% received PHP in route, and 29.0% received PHP both on scene and in route. Initial scene vitals differed between groups, but initial emergency department vitals did not. Receipt of ≥1 PHP increased mortality odds (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.83; p = 0.04). Logistic regression showed increased mortality with each PHP, whether on scene or during transport. Subset analysis of specific PHP revealed that intubation (OR, 10.76; 95% CI, 4.02-28.78; p < 0.001), C-spine immobilization (OR, 5.80; 95% CI, 1.85-18.26; p < 0.01), and pleural decompression (OR, 3.70; 95% CI, 1.33-10.28; p = 0.01) had the highest odds of mortality after adjusting for multiple variables.ConclusionPrehospital procedures in penetrating trauma patients impart no survival advantage and may be harmful in urban settings, even when performed during transport. Therefore, PHP should be forgone in lieu of immediate transport to improve patient outcomes.Level of evidencePrognostic, level III.

Minoritized communities are underreached by biomedical interventions, such as the COVID-19 vaccine. This mixed-methods study identified factors associated with vaccine likelihood (VL) and uptake (VU) among 187 Latino sexual minority men (LSMM) in South Florida. Regression models with LASSO variable selection and Classification and Regression Trees (CART) assessed determinants of VL and VU while open-ended questions were evaluated using thematic content analysis. VL (range 1-7; M = 6.00, SD = 1.84) and VU (63.6%) was high. LASSO modeling identified being insured, worrying about others, fear of transmitting COVID-19, and financial stress as the most influential factors for VL; working remotely from home was important for VU. Time (weeks) since addition of COVID-19 vaccination-related questions (December 2nd, 2020) was associated with both outcomes across both modeling techniques. Convergence between data suggests capitalizing on altruistic motivations and improving accessibility to vaccine campaigns are valuable assets to increase LSMM's vaccine confidence., Author(s): Elliott R. Weinstein [sup.1] , Raymond Balise [sup.2] , Nicholas Metheny [sup.3] , Maria Jose Baeza Robba [sup.3] , Daniel Mayo [sup.4] , Cassandra Michel [sup.1] , Bill Chan [...]

IntroductionPatients who sustain orthopaedic trauma are at an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), including fatal pulmonary embolism (PE). Current guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for VTE prophylaxis in orthopaedic trauma patients. However, emerging literature in total joint arthroplasty patients suggests the potential clinical benefits of VTE prophylaxis with aspirin. The primary aim of this trial is to compare aspirin with LMWH as a thromboprophylaxis in fracture patients.Methods and analysisPREVENT CLOT is a multicentre, randomised, pragmatic trial that aims to enrol 12 200 adult patients admitted to 1 of 21 participating centres with an operative extremity fracture, or any pelvis or acetabular fracture. The primary outcome is all-cause mortality. We will evaluate non-inferiority by testing whether the intention-to-treat difference in the probability of dying within 90 days of randomisation between aspirin and LMWH is less than our non-inferiority margin of 0.75%. Secondary efficacy outcomes include cause-specific mortality, non-fatal PE and deep vein thrombosis. Safety outcomes include bleeding complications, wound complications and deep surgical site infections.Ethics and disseminationThe PREVENT CLOT trial has been approved by the ethics board at the coordinating centre (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health) and all participating sites. Recruitment began in April 2017 and will continue through 2021. As both study medications are currently in clinical use for VTE prophylaxis for orthopaedic trauma patients, the findings of this trial can be easily adopted into clinical practice. The results of this large, patient-centred pragmatic trial will help guide treatment choices to prevent VTE in fracture patients.Trial registration numberNCT02984384.

As trauma surgeons, we focus on the immediate care and needs of the injured patient every day. Historically, trauma and injury research has focused on outcomes such as mortality, complications, and length of stay; and process metrics such as time to CT scan, resuscitation checklist frequencies, or venous thromboembolism prophylaxis rates. These outcomes are perceived by healthcare providers to be important, but patients likely have different perceptions of what outcomes are most important to measure and improve. True patient-centered outcomes research involves the healthcare providers, and the entire team of stakeholders including patients and the community. Understanding the process of stakeholder engagement and the barriers trauma researchers must overcome to effectively enter this field of research is important. This summary aims to inform the trauma research community on the basics of patient-centered outcomes research, priorities for funding from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, resources for collaboration around patient-centered outcomes research, and a unique career development and training opportunity for early career trauma surgeons to develop a skill set in patient-centered outcomes research.

This paper describes the current funding, infrastructure growth and future state of trauma research. It also introduces a group of review articles generated from The Future of Trauma Research: Innovations in Research Methodology conference hosted by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma in July 2019.

According to purpose theory (PT), God’s existence, telic creation of human beings, and human libertarian free will are necessary conditions for human life to be objectively meaningful. In this paper, I raise and respond to four objections to PT: two concerning insufficiencies and two regarding ambiguities in the theory. I conclude that PT-advocates have relatively effective replies to the second insufficiency objection and to both ambiguity objections, but that PT is vulnerable to the first insufficiency objection.

In this article, I contend that (a) disagreement over the definition of ‘good person’ indicates a challenge for the probabilistic argument from evil (PAE) and (b) the debate between value monism and value pluralism exposes obstacles for the PAE. I also highlight areas for further axiological inquiry with respect to the problem of evil and related problems. My goal is not to argue that the PAE fails, but to examine the axiology of the argument, to investigate some of its vulnerabilities, and to motivate novel evaluations of it by reframing it as an axiological rather than moral issue.

Abstract Background Older Latinos living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have been disproportionately affected by the epidemic and experience compounded health disparities that have deepened over time. These health disparities are largely related to lifestyle and are either preventable or amenable to early detection or intervention. Despite existing resources to deliver an intervention to reduce this compounded health disparity, there is little information on the effects of health promotion interventions on indices of cardiometabolic risk in midlife and older Latinos living with HIV. The Happy Older Latinos are Active (HOLA) intervention is an innovative health promotion program that is uniquely tailored to meet the diverse needs and circumstances of older Latinos with HIV. The goal of this manuscript is to describe the protocol of a feasibility study of the HOLA health promotion intervention for older HIV-positive Latino men. Methods/design HOLA, which is informed by Behavioral Activation and Social Learning theory is a community health worker (CHW)-led, multicomponent, health promotion intervention consisting of: (1) a social and physical activation session; (2) a moderately intense group walk led by a CHW for 45 min, 3×/week for 16 weeks; (3) pleasant events (e.g., going to brunch with friends) scheduling. Eighteen community dwelling Latinos living with HIV aged 50+ will be recruited for this feasibility study adapting the HOLA intervention. Participants will be assessed at three time points (baseline, post-intervention, and 3 months post-intervention) on measures of cardiometabolic risk factors (waist circumference, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and glucose), psychosocial functioning, and health-related quality of life. Conclusions If HOLA can be delivered successfully by CHWs, then the scalability, accessibility, and potential for dissemination is increased. Additionally, this study will inform feasibility and identify modifications needed in the design of a larger hypothesis testing study. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT 03839212. Date of Registration: 8 February, 2019.