Undertriage of older trauma patients: is this a national phenomenon?

Older age is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality after injury. Statewide studies suggest significantly injured patients aged ≥55 y are commonly undertriaged to lower level trauma centers (TCs) or nontrauma centers (NTCs). This study determines whether undertriage is a national phenomenon. Using the 2011 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, significantly injured patients aged ≥55 y were identified by diagnosis and new injury severity score (NISS) ≥9. Undertriage was defined as definitive care anywhere other than level I or II TCs. Weighted descriptive analysis compared characteristics of patients by triage status. Multivariable logistic regression determined predictors of undertriage, controlling for hospital characteristics, injury severity, and comorbidities. Of 4,152,541 emergency department (ED) visits meeting inclusion criteria, 74.0% were treated at lower level TCs or NTCs. Patients at level I and II TCs more commonly had NISS ≥9 (22.2% versus 12.3%, P < 0.001), but among all patients with NISS ≥9, 61.3% were undertriaged to a lower level TC or a NTC. On multivariable logistic regression, factors independently associated with higher odds of being undertriaged were increasing age, female gender, and fall-related injuries. A subgroup analysis examined urban and suburban areas only where access to a TC is more likely and found that 55.8% of patients' age were undertriaged. There is substantial undertriage of patients aged ≥55 y nationwide. Over half of significantly injured older patients are not treated at level I or II TCs. The impact of undertriage should be determined to ensure older patients receive trauma care at the optimal site.

Kodadek LM ，Selvarajah S ，Velopulos CG ，Haut ER ，Haider AH ... -  《-》

Undertriage of major trauma patients in the US emergency departments.

There is evidence that regionalized trauma care and appropriate triage of major trauma patients improve patient outcomes. However, the national rate of undertriage and diagnoses of undertriaged patients are unknown. We used the 2010 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample to estimate the national rate of undertriage, identify the prevalent diagnoses, and conduct a simulation analysis of the capacity increase required for level I and II trauma centers (TCs) to accommodate undertriaged patients. Undertriaged patients were those with major trauma, injury severity score ≥ 16, who received definitive care at nontrauma centers (NTCs), or level III TCs. The rate of undertriage was calculated with those receiving definitive care at an NTC center or level III center as a fraction of all major trauma patients. The estimated number of major trauma patient discharges in 2010 was 232448. Level of care was known for 197702 major trauma discharges, and 34.0% were undertriaged in emergency departments (EDs). Elderly patients were at a significantly higher risk of being undertriaged. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) was the most common diagnosis, 40.2% of the undertriaged patient diagnoses. To accommodate all undertriaged patients, level I and II TCs nationally would have to increase their capacity by 51.5%. We found that more than one-third of US ED major trauma patients were undertriaged, and more than 40% of undertriaged diagnoses were TBIs. A significant capacity increase at level I and II TCs to accommodate these patients appears not feasible.

Xiang H ，Wheeler KK ，Groner JI ，Shi J ，Haley KJ ... -  《-》

Undertriage of Trauma-Related Deaths in U.S. Emergency Departments.

Holst JA ，Perman SM ，Capp R ，Haukoos JS ，Ginde AA ... -  《-》

Undertriage in trauma: Does an organized trauma network capture the major trauma victim? A statewide analysis.

Horst MA ，Jammula S ，Gross BW ，Cook AD ，Bradburn EH ，Altenburg J ，Von Nieda D ，Morgan M ，Rogers FB ... -  《-》

Comparative study of ED mortality risk of US trauma patients treated at level I and level II vs nontrauma centers.

Prior studies of undertriage have not made comparisons across multiple trauma levels. Emergency department data was extracted from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample for major trauma patients. We considered patients with moderate injuries (Injury Severity Score, ISS=16-24) and severe injuries (ISS=25-75) separately. Conditional logistic regression modeling was used to compare the odds of ED mortality for level I trauma centers (TC I) vs. nontrauma centers (NTC) and level II trauma centers (TC II) vs. NTC. An innovative 1:1:1 optimal matching (an extension of the traditional pair matching) was used to balance patient characteristics in three groups. To facilitate matching of all NTC patients, 3 subgroups were developed for ISS=16-24 and 2 subgroups for ISS=25-75. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the strength of the association between trauma center designation and ED mortality. For ISS=16-24, 2 of 3 subgroups had marginally significant reduced odds of ED mortality when properly triaged (TC I vs. NTC [T1:OR=0.63; 95%CI: 0.45 - 0.89, T2:OR=0.71;95%CI:0.51-0.99]). For ISS=25-75, both subgroups had significantly reduced odds of emergency department mortality when properly triaged (H1: TC I vs. NTC [OR=0.61; 95%CI: 0.50-0.74]; TC II vs. NTC [OR=0.49; 95%CI: 0.38 - 0.63]; H2: TC I vs. NTC [OR=0.50; 95%CI: 0.41 - 0.60]; TC II vs. NTC [OR=0.42; 95%CI: 0.33 - 0.53]). Conclusions for ISS 25-75 were robust to a hypothesized unobserved confounding variable as shown in sensitivity analysis. Trauma patients with ISS≥25 received most benefit from proper triage. Efforts to reduce undertriage should focus on this population.

Vickers BP ，Shi J ，Lu B ，Wheeler KK ，Peng J ，Groner JI ，Haley KJ ，Xiang H ... -  《-》