BACKGROUND:Disparities in access to postdischarge services for trauma patients exist, and clinic follow-up remains an important avenue to ensure initial and continued access to postdischarge services. In addition, follow-up is vital to rigorous long-term trauma outcomes research. However, there is a relative paucity of literature specifically addressing clinic follow-up. The purposes of this study were to elucidate factors associated with clinic follow-up compliance and noncompliance after discharge from an urban Level I trauma center and to confirm the prevailing notion that follow-up in trauma clinic is poor. METHODS:Our trauma registry was queried for all trauma service discharges of patients 18 years and older for a 2-year period. Patients with incomplete information were excluded. Demographic data such as race/ethnicity and insurance status were collected on all patients. Primary outcome was defined as trauma clinic follow-up within 4 weeks after discharge. Patients compliant with follow-up were compared with noncompliant patients. RESULTS:After exclusion criteria were applied, there were 1,818 discharges included in the analysis, with 564 (31%) complying with follow-up (p G 0.001). Factors significantly associated with follow-up noncompliance included patients older than 35 years, white race, Medicaid/Medicare payers, blunt mechanism, extended hospital length of stay, and discharge to rehabilitation facilities. No insurance, penetrating mechanism, short hospital stay, discharge to home, and weekend discharge were all significantly associated with follow-up compliance. Discharge on weekends and to home were independent predictors of compliance, whereas, Medicaid/Medicare insurance status and operative intervention were independent predictors of noncompliance. CONCLUSION:This study indentifies factors associated with trauma clinic follow-up compliance and confirms the notion that trauma clinic follow-up compliance at an urban Level I trauma center is alarmingly low. These findings may serve as targets to improve follow-up, thereby improving trauma outcomes research and long-term outcomes. Consequently, clinic follow-up compliance warrants further study and consideration as an essential trauma registry datum. (J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;76: 185Y190.

ObjectivesTo document overall, racial, ethnic and intent-specific spatiotemporal trends of firearm-related fatality rates (FRF rates) in the USA.DesignCross-sectional study per year from 2000 to 2010.SettingUSA.ParticipantsAggregate count of all people in the USA from 2000 to 2010.Outcome measuresData from the Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System from 2000 to 2010 was used to determine annual FRF rates per 100 000 and by states, race, ethnicity and intent.ResultsThe average national 11-year FRF rate was 10.21/100 000, from 3.02 in Hawaii to 18.62 in Louisiana: 60% of states had higher than national rates and 41 states showed no temporal change. The average national FRF rates among African-Americans and Caucasians were 18.51 and 9.05/100 000 and among Hispanics and non-Hispanics were 7.13 and 10.13/100 000; Hispanics had a decreasing change of −0.18, p trend<0.0001. In states with increasing trends (Florida and Massachusetts), Caucasians and non-Hispanics drove the rise; while in states with decreasing trends (California, North Carolina, Arizona, Nevada, New York, Illinois, Maryland), Hispanics and African-Americans drove the fall. The average national FRF rates due to homicides (4.1/100 000) and suicides (5.8/100 000) remained constant, but varied between states.ConclusionsEndemic national FRF rates mask a wide variation in time trends between states. FRF rates were twice as high in African-Americans than Caucasians but decreased among Hispanics. Efforts to identify state-specific best practices can contribute to changes in national FRF rates that remain high.

Daily multidisciplinary GRs focused on the VAPB can decrease the incidence of VAP significantly in trauma patients. Ventilator-associated pneumonia correlated with extended mean ventilator, SICU, and hospital days. Interestingly, despite a significant decrease in VAP, a decrease in the mortality rate was not observed. Given the small number of deaths in the VAP cohort, this study has insufficient statistical power to elucidate the true impact of GR intervention or VAP on the mortality rate in trauma patients.

No abstract