Assessing the rates of overtriaging with prehospital trauma team activation protocols.

IF 2.4 CJEM Pub Date : 2025-03-08 DOI:10.1007/s43678-025-00885-7
Kevin Durr, Krishan Yadav, Michael Ho, Jacinthe Lampron, Alexandre Tran, Doran Drew, Andrew Petrosoniak, Christian Vaillancourt, Natalia Kruger, Derek Goltz, Marie-Joe Nemnom, Jeffrey J Perry
{"title":"Assessing the rates of overtriaging with prehospital trauma team activation protocols.","authors":"Kevin Durr, Krishan Yadav, Michael Ho, Jacinthe Lampron, Alexandre Tran, Doran Drew, Andrew Petrosoniak, Christian Vaillancourt, Natalia Kruger, Derek Goltz, Marie-Joe Nemnom, Jeffrey J Perry","doi":"10.1007/s43678-025-00885-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Prehospital trauma team activation protocols are increasingly used to expedite clinical care and potentially improve patient outcomes. However, there is little evidence describing the rates of overtriaging following prehospital activation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In June 2018, prehospital trauma team activation protocols were implemented at the Ottawa Hospital. We conducted a health records review of all adult trauma team activations at this Lead Trauma Hospital from September 2016 to March 2020. Cases were prospectively recorded in the regional trauma registry. Pre-implementation and post-implementation cohorts were divided based on the implementation date of the local activation protocols. Overtriaging rates were compared between both groups. We defined overtriaging as activating the trauma team without any of the following: death, ≥ 48-h admission, intensive care unit admission, operative management, or an injury severity score ≥ 16. We present descriptive statistics with odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals to describe the rates of overtriaging.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed 762 trauma team activations with 384 in the pre-implementation group and 378 in the post-implementation group. The frequency of prehospital trauma team activation was 25.3% (N = 97) in the pre-implementation period, compared to 47.6% (N = 180) in the post-implementation period. There was no statistically significant increase in overtriaging when comparing the pre-implementation (N = 64, 16.7%) and post-implementation (N = 68, 18.0%) groups (OR 1.10; 95% CI 0.75, 1.60). Furthermore, the rate of overtriaging for each individual criterion of the local protocol adhered to guideline recommendations (< 25-35%). Lastly, in the post-implementation period, there was no significant difference in overtriaging with prehospital (N = 30, 16.7%) compared to in-hospital (N = 38, 19.2%) trauma team activation (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.50, 1.43).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study demonstrates that the local prehospital trauma team activation protocol did not result in a statistically significant rise in overtriaging. These findings demonstrate that implementing center-specific prehospital trauma team activation protocols did not increase overtriaging rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":93937,"journal":{"name":"CJEM","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CJEM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-025-00885-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Prehospital trauma team activation protocols are increasingly used to expedite clinical care and potentially improve patient outcomes. However, there is little evidence describing the rates of overtriaging following prehospital activation.

Methods: In June 2018, prehospital trauma team activation protocols were implemented at the Ottawa Hospital. We conducted a health records review of all adult trauma team activations at this Lead Trauma Hospital from September 2016 to March 2020. Cases were prospectively recorded in the regional trauma registry. Pre-implementation and post-implementation cohorts were divided based on the implementation date of the local activation protocols. Overtriaging rates were compared between both groups. We defined overtriaging as activating the trauma team without any of the following: death, ≥ 48-h admission, intensive care unit admission, operative management, or an injury severity score ≥ 16. We present descriptive statistics with odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals to describe the rates of overtriaging.

Results: We analyzed 762 trauma team activations with 384 in the pre-implementation group and 378 in the post-implementation group. The frequency of prehospital trauma team activation was 25.3% (N = 97) in the pre-implementation period, compared to 47.6% (N = 180) in the post-implementation period. There was no statistically significant increase in overtriaging when comparing the pre-implementation (N = 64, 16.7%) and post-implementation (N = 68, 18.0%) groups (OR 1.10; 95% CI 0.75, 1.60). Furthermore, the rate of overtriaging for each individual criterion of the local protocol adhered to guideline recommendations (< 25-35%). Lastly, in the post-implementation period, there was no significant difference in overtriaging with prehospital (N = 30, 16.7%) compared to in-hospital (N = 38, 19.2%) trauma team activation (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.50, 1.43).

Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that the local prehospital trauma team activation protocol did not result in a statistically significant rise in overtriaging. These findings demonstrate that implementing center-specific prehospital trauma team activation protocols did not increase overtriaging rates.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Just the facts: diagnosis and management of heat stroke. Back so soon?: the role of initial triage category in ED return visits. Just the facts: erector spinae plane blocks for rib fractures in the emergency department. Seasonality and school day-based trends in mental-health-related pediatric emergency department visits during COVID-19 in British Columbia. What is the gold standard for ECG interpretation: computer, cardiologist, or patient outcome?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1