ObjectiveIn the era of damage control resuscitation of trauma patients with acute major haemorrhage, transfusion practice has evolved to blood component (component therapy) administered in a ratio that closely approximates whole blood (WB). However, there is a paucity of evidence supporting the optimal transfusion strategy in these patients. The primary objective was therefore to establish if there is an improvement in survival at 30 days with the use of WB transfusion compared with blood component therapy in adult trauma patients with acute major haemorrhage.MethodologyA systematic literature search was performed on 15 December 2019 to identify studies comparing WB transfusion with component therapy in adult trauma patients and mortality at 30 days. Studies which did not report mortality were excluded. Methodological quality of included studies was interpreted using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and rated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.ResultsSearch of the databases identified 1885 records, and six studies met the inclusion criteria involving 3255 patients. Of the three studies reporting 30-day mortality (one randomised controlled trial (moderate evidence) and two retrospective (low and very low evidence, respectively)), only one study demonstrated a statistically significant difference between WB and component therapy, and two found no statistical difference. Two retrospective studies reporting in-hospital mortality found no statistical difference in unadjusted mortality, but both reported statistically significant logistic regression analyses demonstrating that those with a WB transfusion strategy were less likely to die.ConclusionRecognising the limitations of this systematic review relating to the poor-quality evidence and limited number of included trials, it does not provide evidence to support or reject use of WB transfusion compared with component therapy for adult trauma patients with acute major haemorrhage.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019131406.

Recent research demonstrates that transfusing whole blood (WB=red blood cells (RBC)+plasma+platelets) rather than just RBC (which is current National Health Service (NHS) practice) may improve outcomes for major trauma patients. As part of a programme to investigate provision of WB, NHS Blood and Transplant undertook a 2-year feasibility study to supply the Royal London Hospital (RLH) with (group O negative, ‘O neg’) leucodepleted red cell and plasma (LD-RCP) for transfusion of trauma patients with major haemorrhage in prehospital settings.Incidents requiring such prehospital transfusion occur randomly, with very high variation. Availability is critical, but O neg LD-RCP is a scarce resource and has a limited shelf life (14 days) after which it must be disposed of. The consequences of wastage are the opportunity cost of loss of overall treatment capacity across the NHS and reputational damage.The context was this feasibility study, set up to assess deliverability to RLH and subsequent wastage levels. Within this, we conducted a quality improvement project, which aimed to reduce the wastage of LD-RCP to no more than 8% (ie, 1 of the 12 units delivered per week).Over this 2-year period, we reduced wastage from a weekly average of 70%–27%. This was achieved over four improvement cycles. The largest improvement came from moving near-expiry LD-RCP to the emergency department (ED) for use with their trauma patients, with subsequent improvements from embedding use in ED as routine practice, introducing a dedicated LD-RCP delivery schedule (which increased the units ≤2 days old at delivery from 42% to 83%) and aligning this delivery schedule to cover two cycles of peak demand (Fridays and Saturdays).

Background Despite a widely acknowledged increase in older people presenting with traumatic injury in western populations there remains a lack of research into the optimal prehospital management of this vulnerable patient group. Research into this cohort faces many uniqu1e challenges, such as inconsistent definitions, variable physiology, non-linear presentation and multi-morbidity. This scoping review sought to summarise the main challenges in providing prehospital care to older trauma patients to improve the care for this vulnerable group. Methods and findings A scoping review was performed searching Google Scholar, PubMed and Medline from 2000 until 2020 for literature in English addressing the management of older trauma patients in both the prehospital arena and Emergency Department. A thematic analysis and narrative synthesis was conducted on the included 131 studies. Age-threshold was confirmed by a descriptive analysis from all included studies. The majority of the studies assessed triage and found that recognition and undertriage presented a significant challenge, with adverse effects on mortality. We identified six key challenges in the prehospital field that were summarised in this review. Conclusions Trauma in older people is common and challenges prehospital care providers in numerous ways that are difficult to address. Undertriage and the potential for age bias remain prevalent. In this Scoping Review, we identified and discussed six major challenges that are unique to the prehospital environment. More high-quality evidence is needed to investigate this issue further.

No abstract