Real-time attending trauma surgeon assessment of direct-to-operating room trauma resuscitations: Results from a prospective observational study.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Direct-to-operating room (DOR) resuscitation expedites interventions for trauma patients. Perceived benefit from the surgeon's perspective is not well known. This study assesses the integration of a real-time surgeon assessment tool into a DOR protocol. METHODS Surgeon assessment tool results from a prospective study of DOR cases were analyzed. Analysis assessed patient factors and surgeon perception for appropriateness and benefit of DOR. Multivariate analysis identified independent factors associated with perceived DOR benefit. RESULTS A total of 104 trauma patients underwent DOR resuscitation; 84% were perceived as appropriate triage, and 48% as beneficial. Patients with Injury Severity Score of >15 (50% vs. 28%), systolic blood pressure of <90 mm Hg (24% vs. 9%), and severe abdominal injury (28% vs. 9%) had higher perceived DOR benefits (all p < 0.05). Patients deemed to benefit from DOR underwent more emergent interventions or truncal surgery (44% vs. 92%, p < 0.01). No difference in benefit was seen based on age, sex, Glasgow Coma Scale score of <9, or injury mechanism. Forty-four percent had perceived benefit from DOR resuscitation despite requiring imaging after initial evaluation. Patients with perceived benefit had a higher rate of unplanned return to the operating room (16% vs. 2%, p < 0.05), but no differences in complication rates, Glasgow Outcome Score, or mortality. Injury Severity Score of >15 was the only independently associated variable with a perceived benefit on surgeon assessment tool (odds ratio, 3.5; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION The majority of DOR resuscitations were deemed as appropriately triaged, and approximately half had a perceived benefit. Benefit was associated with higher injury severity and the need for urgent interventions but was not predicted by injury mechanism or other triage variables. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.