Comparison of Injured Older Adults Included in vs Excluded from Trauma Registries with 1-Year Follow-up

Craig Newgard, Aaron Caughey, Kenneth (John) McConnell, Amber Lin, Elizabeth Eckstrom, Denise Griffiths, Susan Malveau, Eileen Bulger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Importance: Trauma registries are the primary data mechanism in trauma systems to evaluate and improve the care of injured patients. Research has suggested that trauma registries may miss high-risk older adults, who commonly experience morbidity and mortality after injury. Objective: To compare injured older adults who were included in with those excluded from trauma registries, with a focus on patients with serious injuries, requiring major surgery, or dying after injury. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included all injured adults 65 years and older transported by 44 emergency medical services agencies to 51 trauma and nontrauma centers in 7 counties in Oregon and Washington from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2011, with follow-up through December 31, 2012. Record linkage was used to match emergency medical services records with state trauma registries, state discharge databases, state death registries, and Medicare claims. Data were analyzed from August to November 2018. Exposures: Inclusion in vs exclusion from a trauma registry. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality up to 12 months, including time to death and causes of death. Results: Of 8161 included patients, 5579 (68.4%) were women, and the mean (SE) age was 82.2 (0.10) years. A total of 1720 older adults (21.1%) were matched to a trauma registry record. Seriously injured patients not captured by trauma registries ranged from 18% (7 of 38 patients with abdominal-pelvic Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater) to 80.0% (1792 of 2241 patients with extremity Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater), while 68 of 186 patients requiring major nonorthopedic surgery (36.6%) and 1809 of 2325 patients requiring orthopedic surgery (77.8%) were not included in trauma registries. Of patients with serious injuries or undergoing major surgery missed by trauma registries (range by injury and procedure type, 36.0% to 57.1%), 36.4% (39.3% when excluding serious extremity injuries and orthopedic procedures) were treated at trauma centers, particularly level III through V hospitals. When registry and nonregistry groups were tracked over 12 months, 93 of 188 in-hospital deaths (49.5%) and 1531 of 1887 total deaths (81.1%) occurred in the nonregistry cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: In their current form, trauma registries are ineffective in capturing, tracking, and evaluating injured older adults, although mortality following injury is frequently due to noninjury causes. High-risk injured older adults are not included in registries because of care in nontrauma hospitals, restrictive registry inclusion criteria, and being missed by registries in trauma centers

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJAMA Surgery
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Registries
Wounds and Injuries
Trauma Centers
Abbreviated Injury Scale
Emergency Medical Services
Mortality
Extremities
Orthopedic Procedures
Medicare
Medical Records
Orthopedics
Cause of Death
Patient Care
Cohort Studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Comparison of Injured Older Adults Included in vs Excluded from Trauma Registries with 1-Year Follow-up. / Newgard, Craig; Caughey, Aaron; McConnell, Kenneth (John); Lin, Amber; Eckstrom, Elizabeth; Griffiths, Denise; Malveau, Susan; Bulger, Eileen.

In: JAMA Surgery, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1ce3bcc234a64f989553d8af31f3e659,
title = "Comparison of Injured Older Adults Included in vs Excluded from Trauma Registries with 1-Year Follow-up",
abstract = "Importance: Trauma registries are the primary data mechanism in trauma systems to evaluate and improve the care of injured patients. Research has suggested that trauma registries may miss high-risk older adults, who commonly experience morbidity and mortality after injury. Objective: To compare injured older adults who were included in with those excluded from trauma registries, with a focus on patients with serious injuries, requiring major surgery, or dying after injury. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included all injured adults 65 years and older transported by 44 emergency medical services agencies to 51 trauma and nontrauma centers in 7 counties in Oregon and Washington from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2011, with follow-up through December 31, 2012. Record linkage was used to match emergency medical services records with state trauma registries, state discharge databases, state death registries, and Medicare claims. Data were analyzed from August to November 2018. Exposures: Inclusion in vs exclusion from a trauma registry. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality up to 12 months, including time to death and causes of death. Results: Of 8161 included patients, 5579 (68.4{\%}) were women, and the mean (SE) age was 82.2 (0.10) years. A total of 1720 older adults (21.1{\%}) were matched to a trauma registry record. Seriously injured patients not captured by trauma registries ranged from 18{\%} (7 of 38 patients with abdominal-pelvic Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater) to 80.0{\%} (1792 of 2241 patients with extremity Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater), while 68 of 186 patients requiring major nonorthopedic surgery (36.6{\%}) and 1809 of 2325 patients requiring orthopedic surgery (77.8{\%}) were not included in trauma registries. Of patients with serious injuries or undergoing major surgery missed by trauma registries (range by injury and procedure type, 36.0{\%} to 57.1{\%}), 36.4{\%} (39.3{\%} when excluding serious extremity injuries and orthopedic procedures) were treated at trauma centers, particularly level III through V hospitals. When registry and nonregistry groups were tracked over 12 months, 93 of 188 in-hospital deaths (49.5{\%}) and 1531 of 1887 total deaths (81.1{\%}) occurred in the nonregistry cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: In their current form, trauma registries are ineffective in capturing, tracking, and evaluating injured older adults, although mortality following injury is frequently due to noninjury causes. High-risk injured older adults are not included in registries because of care in nontrauma hospitals, restrictive registry inclusion criteria, and being missed by registries in trauma centers",
author = "Craig Newgard and Aaron Caughey and McConnell, {Kenneth (John)} and Amber Lin and Elizabeth Eckstrom and Denise Griffiths and Susan Malveau and Eileen Bulger",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/jamasurg.2019.2279",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "JAMA Surgery",
issn = "2168-6254",
publisher = "American Medical Association",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of Injured Older Adults Included in vs Excluded from Trauma Registries with 1-Year Follow-up

AU - Newgard, Craig

AU - Caughey, Aaron

AU - McConnell, Kenneth (John)

AU - Lin, Amber

AU - Eckstrom, Elizabeth

AU - Griffiths, Denise

AU - Malveau, Susan

AU - Bulger, Eileen

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Importance: Trauma registries are the primary data mechanism in trauma systems to evaluate and improve the care of injured patients. Research has suggested that trauma registries may miss high-risk older adults, who commonly experience morbidity and mortality after injury. Objective: To compare injured older adults who were included in with those excluded from trauma registries, with a focus on patients with serious injuries, requiring major surgery, or dying after injury. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included all injured adults 65 years and older transported by 44 emergency medical services agencies to 51 trauma and nontrauma centers in 7 counties in Oregon and Washington from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2011, with follow-up through December 31, 2012. Record linkage was used to match emergency medical services records with state trauma registries, state discharge databases, state death registries, and Medicare claims. Data were analyzed from August to November 2018. Exposures: Inclusion in vs exclusion from a trauma registry. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality up to 12 months, including time to death and causes of death. Results: Of 8161 included patients, 5579 (68.4%) were women, and the mean (SE) age was 82.2 (0.10) years. A total of 1720 older adults (21.1%) were matched to a trauma registry record. Seriously injured patients not captured by trauma registries ranged from 18% (7 of 38 patients with abdominal-pelvic Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater) to 80.0% (1792 of 2241 patients with extremity Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater), while 68 of 186 patients requiring major nonorthopedic surgery (36.6%) and 1809 of 2325 patients requiring orthopedic surgery (77.8%) were not included in trauma registries. Of patients with serious injuries or undergoing major surgery missed by trauma registries (range by injury and procedure type, 36.0% to 57.1%), 36.4% (39.3% when excluding serious extremity injuries and orthopedic procedures) were treated at trauma centers, particularly level III through V hospitals. When registry and nonregistry groups were tracked over 12 months, 93 of 188 in-hospital deaths (49.5%) and 1531 of 1887 total deaths (81.1%) occurred in the nonregistry cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: In their current form, trauma registries are ineffective in capturing, tracking, and evaluating injured older adults, although mortality following injury is frequently due to noninjury causes. High-risk injured older adults are not included in registries because of care in nontrauma hospitals, restrictive registry inclusion criteria, and being missed by registries in trauma centers

AB - Importance: Trauma registries are the primary data mechanism in trauma systems to evaluate and improve the care of injured patients. Research has suggested that trauma registries may miss high-risk older adults, who commonly experience morbidity and mortality after injury. Objective: To compare injured older adults who were included in with those excluded from trauma registries, with a focus on patients with serious injuries, requiring major surgery, or dying after injury. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included all injured adults 65 years and older transported by 44 emergency medical services agencies to 51 trauma and nontrauma centers in 7 counties in Oregon and Washington from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2011, with follow-up through December 31, 2012. Record linkage was used to match emergency medical services records with state trauma registries, state discharge databases, state death registries, and Medicare claims. Data were analyzed from August to November 2018. Exposures: Inclusion in vs exclusion from a trauma registry. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality up to 12 months, including time to death and causes of death. Results: Of 8161 included patients, 5579 (68.4%) were women, and the mean (SE) age was 82.2 (0.10) years. A total of 1720 older adults (21.1%) were matched to a trauma registry record. Seriously injured patients not captured by trauma registries ranged from 18% (7 of 38 patients with abdominal-pelvic Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater) to 80.0% (1792 of 2241 patients with extremity Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater), while 68 of 186 patients requiring major nonorthopedic surgery (36.6%) and 1809 of 2325 patients requiring orthopedic surgery (77.8%) were not included in trauma registries. Of patients with serious injuries or undergoing major surgery missed by trauma registries (range by injury and procedure type, 36.0% to 57.1%), 36.4% (39.3% when excluding serious extremity injuries and orthopedic procedures) were treated at trauma centers, particularly level III through V hospitals. When registry and nonregistry groups were tracked over 12 months, 93 of 188 in-hospital deaths (49.5%) and 1531 of 1887 total deaths (81.1%) occurred in the nonregistry cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: In their current form, trauma registries are ineffective in capturing, tracking, and evaluating injured older adults, although mortality following injury is frequently due to noninjury causes. High-risk injured older adults are not included in registries because of care in nontrauma hospitals, restrictive registry inclusion criteria, and being missed by registries in trauma centers

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068908717&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068908717&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.2279

DO - 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.2279

M3 - Article

JO - JAMA Surgery

JF - JAMA Surgery

SN - 2168-6254

ER -