Decreased intracranial pressure monitor use at level II trauma centers is associated with increased mortality

Galinos Barmparas, Matthew Singer, Eric Ley, Rex Chung, Darren Malinoski, Daniel Margulies, Ali Salim, Marko Bukur

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Previous investigations suggest outcome differences at Level I and Level II trauma centers. We examined use of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitors at Level I and Level II trauma centers after traumatic brain injury (TBI) and its effect on mortality. The 2007 to 2008 National Trauma Databank was reviewed for patients with an indication for ICP monitoring based on Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guidelines. Demographic and clinical outcomes at Level I and Level II centers were compared by regression modeling. Overall, 15,921 patients met inclusion criteria; 11,017 were admitted to a Level I and 4,904 to a Level II trauma center. Patients with TBI admitted to a Level II trauma center had a lower rate of Injury Severity Score greater than 16 (80 vs 82%, P <0.01) and lower frequency of head Abbreviated Injury Score greater than 3 (80 vs 82%, P <0.01). After regression modeling, patients with TBI admitted to a Level II trauma center were 31 per cent less likely to receive an ICP monitor (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.69; P <0.01) and had a significantly higher mortality (AOR, 1.12; P <0.01). Admission to a Level II trauma center after severe TBI is associated with a decreased use of ICP monitoring in patients who meet BTF criteria as well as an increased mortality. These differences should be validated prospectively to narrow these discrepancies in care and outcomes between Level I and Level II centers. Copyright Southeastern Surgical Congress. All rights reserved.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1166-1171
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Surgeon
Volume78
Issue number10
StatePublished - Oct 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Trauma Centers
Intracranial Pressure
Mortality
Odds Ratio
Injury Severity Score
Physiologic Monitoring
Craniocerebral Trauma
Traumatic Brain Injury
Demography
Databases
Guidelines
Wounds and Injuries

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Barmparas, G., Singer, M., Ley, E., Chung, R., Malinoski, D., Margulies, D., ... Bukur, M. (2012). Decreased intracranial pressure monitor use at level II trauma centers is associated with increased mortality. American Surgeon, 78(10), 1166-1171.

Decreased intracranial pressure monitor use at level II trauma centers is associated with increased mortality. / Barmparas, Galinos; Singer, Matthew; Ley, Eric; Chung, Rex; Malinoski, Darren; Margulies, Daniel; Salim, Ali; Bukur, Marko.

In: American Surgeon, Vol. 78, No. 10, 10.2012, p. 1166-1171.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Barmparas, G, Singer, M, Ley, E, Chung, R, Malinoski, D, Margulies, D, Salim, A & Bukur, M 2012, 'Decreased intracranial pressure monitor use at level II trauma centers is associated with increased mortality', American Surgeon, vol. 78, no. 10, pp. 1166-1171.
Barmparas, Galinos ; Singer, Matthew ; Ley, Eric ; Chung, Rex ; Malinoski, Darren ; Margulies, Daniel ; Salim, Ali ; Bukur, Marko. / Decreased intracranial pressure monitor use at level II trauma centers is associated with increased mortality. In: American Surgeon. 2012 ; Vol. 78, No. 10. pp. 1166-1171.
@article{9af93da1c751418d937816a7d7eddcc2,
title = "Decreased intracranial pressure monitor use at level II trauma centers is associated with increased mortality",
abstract = "Previous investigations suggest outcome differences at Level I and Level II trauma centers. We examined use of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitors at Level I and Level II trauma centers after traumatic brain injury (TBI) and its effect on mortality. The 2007 to 2008 National Trauma Databank was reviewed for patients with an indication for ICP monitoring based on Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guidelines. Demographic and clinical outcomes at Level I and Level II centers were compared by regression modeling. Overall, 15,921 patients met inclusion criteria; 11,017 were admitted to a Level I and 4,904 to a Level II trauma center. Patients with TBI admitted to a Level II trauma center had a lower rate of Injury Severity Score greater than 16 (80 vs 82{\%}, P <0.01) and lower frequency of head Abbreviated Injury Score greater than 3 (80 vs 82{\%}, P <0.01). After regression modeling, patients with TBI admitted to a Level II trauma center were 31 per cent less likely to receive an ICP monitor (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.69; P <0.01) and had a significantly higher mortality (AOR, 1.12; P <0.01). Admission to a Level II trauma center after severe TBI is associated with a decreased use of ICP monitoring in patients who meet BTF criteria as well as an increased mortality. These differences should be validated prospectively to narrow these discrepancies in care and outcomes between Level I and Level II centers. Copyright Southeastern Surgical Congress. All rights reserved.",
author = "Galinos Barmparas and Matthew Singer and Eric Ley and Rex Chung and Darren Malinoski and Daniel Margulies and Ali Salim and Marko Bukur",
year = "2012",
month = "10",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "78",
pages = "1166--1171",
journal = "The American surgeon",
issn = "0003-1348",
publisher = "Southeastern Surgical Congress",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Decreased intracranial pressure monitor use at level II trauma centers is associated with increased mortality

AU - Barmparas, Galinos

AU - Singer, Matthew

AU - Ley, Eric

AU - Chung, Rex

AU - Malinoski, Darren

AU - Margulies, Daniel

AU - Salim, Ali

AU - Bukur, Marko

PY - 2012/10

Y1 - 2012/10

N2 - Previous investigations suggest outcome differences at Level I and Level II trauma centers. We examined use of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitors at Level I and Level II trauma centers after traumatic brain injury (TBI) and its effect on mortality. The 2007 to 2008 National Trauma Databank was reviewed for patients with an indication for ICP monitoring based on Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guidelines. Demographic and clinical outcomes at Level I and Level II centers were compared by regression modeling. Overall, 15,921 patients met inclusion criteria; 11,017 were admitted to a Level I and 4,904 to a Level II trauma center. Patients with TBI admitted to a Level II trauma center had a lower rate of Injury Severity Score greater than 16 (80 vs 82%, P <0.01) and lower frequency of head Abbreviated Injury Score greater than 3 (80 vs 82%, P <0.01). After regression modeling, patients with TBI admitted to a Level II trauma center were 31 per cent less likely to receive an ICP monitor (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.69; P <0.01) and had a significantly higher mortality (AOR, 1.12; P <0.01). Admission to a Level II trauma center after severe TBI is associated with a decreased use of ICP monitoring in patients who meet BTF criteria as well as an increased mortality. These differences should be validated prospectively to narrow these discrepancies in care and outcomes between Level I and Level II centers. Copyright Southeastern Surgical Congress. All rights reserved.

AB - Previous investigations suggest outcome differences at Level I and Level II trauma centers. We examined use of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitors at Level I and Level II trauma centers after traumatic brain injury (TBI) and its effect on mortality. The 2007 to 2008 National Trauma Databank was reviewed for patients with an indication for ICP monitoring based on Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guidelines. Demographic and clinical outcomes at Level I and Level II centers were compared by regression modeling. Overall, 15,921 patients met inclusion criteria; 11,017 were admitted to a Level I and 4,904 to a Level II trauma center. Patients with TBI admitted to a Level II trauma center had a lower rate of Injury Severity Score greater than 16 (80 vs 82%, P <0.01) and lower frequency of head Abbreviated Injury Score greater than 3 (80 vs 82%, P <0.01). After regression modeling, patients with TBI admitted to a Level II trauma center were 31 per cent less likely to receive an ICP monitor (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.69; P <0.01) and had a significantly higher mortality (AOR, 1.12; P <0.01). Admission to a Level II trauma center after severe TBI is associated with a decreased use of ICP monitoring in patients who meet BTF criteria as well as an increased mortality. These differences should be validated prospectively to narrow these discrepancies in care and outcomes between Level I and Level II centers. Copyright Southeastern Surgical Congress. All rights reserved.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84866766220&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84866766220&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 23025964

AN - SCOPUS:84866766220

VL - 78

SP - 1166

EP - 1171

JO - The American surgeon

JF - The American surgeon

SN - 0003-1348

IS - 10

ER -