Objective The authors examined the incidence and predictors of peritraumatic distress and dissociation after one of the most common forms of civilian trauma exposure: motor vehicle collision (MVC). Methods In this study, patients presenting to the emergency department after MVC who were without serious injury and discharged to home after evaluation (n = 935) completed an emergency department interview evaluating sociodemographic, collision-related, and psychological characteristics. Results The incidence and predictors of distress (Peritraumatic Distress Inventory score ≥ 23) and dissociation (Michigan Critical Events Perception Scale score >3) were assessed. Distress was present in 355 of 935 patients (38%) and dissociation was present in 260 of 942 patients (28%). These outcomes showed only moderate correlation (r = 0.45), and had both shared and distinct predictors. Female gender, anxiety symptoms prior to MVC, and vehicle damage severity predicted both distress and dissociation. Higher socioeconomic status (higher education, higher income, full time employment) had a protective effect against distress but not dissociative symptoms. Better physical health and worse overall mental health were associated with increased risk of dissociation, but not distress. Distress but not dissociation was associated with lower patient confidence in recovery and a longer expected duration of recovery. Conclusion There are unique predictors of peritraumatic distress and dissociation. Further work is needed to better understand the neurobiology of peritraumatic distress and dissociation, and the influence of these peritraumatic outcomes on persistent psychological sequelae.

No abstract

Acute Medicine is a specialty that is not defined by a single organ system and sits at the interface between primary and secondary care. In order to document improvements in the quality of care delivered a system of metrics is required. A number of frameworks for measurements exist to quantify quality of care at the level of patients, teams and organisations, such as measures of population health, patient satisfaction and cost per patient. Measures can capture whether care is safe, effective, patient-centred, timely, efficient and equitable. Measurement in Acute Medicine is challenged by the often-transient nature of the contact between Acute Medicine clinicians and patients, the lack of diagnostic labels, a low degree of standardisation and difficulties in capturing the patient experience in the context. In a time of increasing ecological and financial constraints, reflecting about the most appropriate metrics to document the impact of Acute Medicine is required.

No abstract

No abstract