COVID-19: lessons learnt and priorities in trauma and orthopaedic surgery

The COVID-19 pandemic is the most serious health crisis of our time. Global public measures have been enacted to try to prevent healthcare systems from being overwhelmed. The trauma and orthopaedic (T&O) community has overcome challenges in order to continue to deliver acute trauma care to patients and plan for challenges ahead. This review explores the lessons learnt, the priorities and the controversies that the T&O community has faced during the crisis. Historically, the experience of major incidents in T&O has focused on mass casualty events. The current pandemic requires a different approach to resource management in order to create a long-term, system-sustaining model of care alongside a move towards resource balancing and facilitation. Significant limitations in theatre access, anaesthetists and bed capacity have necessitated adaptation. Strategic changes to trauma networks and risk mitigation allowed for ongoing surgical treatment of trauma. Outpatient care was reformed with the uptake of technology. The return to elective surgery requires careful planning, restructuring of elective pathways and risk management. Despite the hope that mass vaccination will lift the pressure on bed capacity and on bleak economic forecasts, the orthopaedic community must readjust its focus to meet the challenge of huge backlogs in elective caseloads before looking to the future with a robust strategy of integrated resilient pathways. The pandemic will provide the impetus for research that defines essential interventions and facilitates the implementation of strategies to overcome current barriers and to prepare for future crises.

Toward an all-inclusive trauma system in Central South Ontario: development of the Trauma- System Performance Improvement and Knowledge Exchange (T-SPIKE) project

Background: There is currently no integrated data system to capture the true burden of injury and its management within Ontario’s regional trauma networks (RTNs), largely owing to difficulties in identifying these patients across the multiple health care provider records. Our project represents an iterative effort to create the ability to chart the course of care for all injured patients within the Central South RTN. Methods: Through broad stakeholder engagement of major health care provider organizations within the Central South RTN, we obtained research ethics board approval and established data-sharing agreements with multiple agencies. We tested identification of trauma cases from Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 2017, and methods to link patient records between the various echelons of care to identify barriers to linkage and opportunities for administrative solutions. Results: During 2017, potential trauma cases were identified within ground paramedic services (23 107 records), air medical transport services (196 records), referring hospitals (7194 records) and the lead trauma hospital trauma registry (1134 records). Linkage rates for medical records between services ranged from 49% to 92%. Conclusion: We successfully conceptualized and provided a preliminary demonstration of an initiative to collect, collate and accurately link primary data from acute trauma care providers for certain patients injured within the Central South RTN. Administration-level changes to the capture and management of trauma data represent the greatest opportunity for improvement.

Missed orthopaedic injuries in adult trauma patients at a major trauma centre

IntroductionDespite advances in trauma care, missed injury remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in trauma worldwide. In England, few have published their missed injury rates and there are no recent data for London. In 2010 London trauma networks were restructured and the impact on missed injury rates is not known. This study aimed to determine the incidence of missed orthopaedic injury for adult trauma patients at St George’s Hospital, London, and to analyse missed injuries and comment on risk factors.MethodTrauma patients were recorded prospectively at the daily trauma meeting from July to September 2012. The researcher attended clinical activities and reviewed the patient notes and radiology reports daily whilst each patient was an inpatient until discharge. Missed injuries were defined as fractures or dislocations discovered more than 12 h after arrival in the emergency department. The notes for missed injury patients were reviewed again at six months. Missed injury details were recorded/analysed.ResultsThree hundred and forty three adult trauma patients were referred to trauma and orthopaedics in the three-month study period; 5 (1.5%) had a missed injury and 148 (43.1%) had an ISS>15. All missed injuries occurred in these major trauma patients, giving an incidence of 5/148 (3.4%). Four were extremity injuries and one was cervical. All missed injury patients had a GCS of 15/15, were admitted outside normal working hours, were direct admissions and had whole-body CT.ConclusionsAt 3.4% our missed injury incidence is comparable to those published from similar major trauma centres. This provides recent London data following the restructuring of trauma networks.

A study of mapping usual care and unmet need for vocational rehabilitation and psychological support following major trauma in five health districts in the UK

Objective: To identify where and how trauma survivors’ rehabilitation needs are met after trauma, to map rehabilitation across five UK major trauma networks, and to compare with recommended pathways. Design: Qualitative study (interviews, focus groups, workshops) using soft-systems methodology to map usual care across trauma networks and explore service gaps. Publicly available documents were consulted. CATWOE (Customers, Actors, Transformation, Worldview, Owners, Environment) was used as an analytic framework to explore the relationship between stakeholders in the pathway. Setting: Five major trauma networks across the UK. Subjects: 106 key rehabilitation stakeholders (service providers, trauma survivors) were recruited to interviews ( n = 46), focus groups ( n = 4 groups, 17 participants) and workshops ( n = 5 workshops, 43 participants). Interventions: None. Results: Mapping of rehabilitation pathways identified several issues: (1) lack of vocational/psychological support particularly for musculoskeletal injuries; (2) inconsistent service provision in areas located further from major trauma centres; (3) lack of communication between acute and community care; (4) long waiting lists (up to 12 months) for community rehabilitation; (5) most well-established pathways were neurologically focused. Conclusions: The trauma rehabilitation pathway is complex and varies across the UK with few, if any patients following the recommended pathway. Services have developed piecemeal to address specific issues, but rarely meet the needs of individuals with multiple impairments post-trauma, with a lack of vocational rehabilitation and psychological support for this population.

Spinal clearance and management of spinal cord injury in the trauma patient

The British Orthopaedic Association's Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics outline the essential clinical standards for spinal clearance and management of spinal cord injury in the acute trauma patient. From initial presentation in the hospital setting to long-term rehabilitation, the recommendations for clinical assessment, imaging, treatment priorities and the role of trauma networks are summarised.

Pre-hospital emergency medicine

This chapter in the Oxford Handbook of Clinical Specialties explores the specialty of pre-hospital emergency medicine. It reviews pre-hospital emergency medicine in general, including activation of the emergency services and major trauma networks in the UK. It gives practical advice on assessment on arrival at the scene, hazards to consider, triage, and initial patient assessment before going into specifics including how to deal with shock, the entrapped patient, pre-hospital analgesia, splintage and manipulation, and injuries to the head, spine, and chest. It explores pre-hospital care of special interest groups and emergency anaesthesia, traumatic cardiac arrest, and how to approach a major incident. It investigates the importance of public health, and how to develop lasting resilience as a member of the pre-hospital emergency team.

A novel Caldicott-compliant hospital imaging protocol for open fracture photography

Open fractures incur significant morbidity and mortality, and as such have standardised guidelines for their management. Photography of open fractures is an essential component of documentation in the treatment of open fractures as per the British Orthopaedic Association Standards of Trauma and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Smartphones have made photography easily accessible to the clinician, but serious concerns exist regarding data security and the consent process around the use of sensitive clinical images. This project sought to overcome this issue by developing a Caldicott-compliant hospital imaging protocol that allows clinicians to use their smartphone to upload open fracture images into the patient's permanent record. Implementation of the protocol was audited and resulted in the increase of safe and secure open fracture photographic storage to inpatient medical records. This protocol would be transferrable to other hospital trusts and could be adopted across major trauma networks.

Age and the distribution of major injury across a national trauma system

Background Trauma places a significant burden on healthcare services, and its management impacts greatly on the injured patient. The demographic of major trauma is changing as the population ages, increasingly unveiling gaps in processes of managing older patients. Key to improving patient care is the ability to characterise current patient distribution. Objectives There is no contemporary evidence available to characterise how age impacts on trauma patient distribution at a national level. Through an analysis of the Trauma Audit Research Network (TARN) database, we describe the nature of Major Trauma in England since the configuration of regional trauma networks, with focus on injury distribution, ultimate treating institution and any transfer in-between. Methods The TARN database was analysed for all patients presenting from April 2012 to the end of October 2017 in NHS England. Results About 307,307 patients were included, of which 63.8% presented directly to a non-specialist hospital (trauma unit (TU)). Fall from standing height in older patients, presenting and largely remaining in TUs, dominates the English trauma caseload. Contrary to perception, major trauma patients currently are being cared for in both specialist (major trauma centres (MTCs)) and non-specialist (TU) hospitals. Paediatric trauma accounts for <5% of trauma cases and is focussed on paediatric MTCs. Conclusions Within adult major trauma patients in England, mechanism of injury is dominated by low level falls, particularly in older people. These patients are predominately cared for in TUs. This work illustrates the reality of current care pathways for major trauma patients in England in the recently configured regional trauma networks.