Andrew-Paul Deeb1, Heather M Phelos2, Andrew B Peitzman2, Timothy R Billiar2, Jason L Sperry2, Joshua B Brown2. 1. Division of Trauma and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: deeba@upmc.edu. 2. Division of Trauma and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Trauma field triage matches injured patients to the appropriate level of care. Prior work suggests the Glasgow Coma Scale motor (GCSm) is as accurate as the total GCS (GCSt) and easier to use. However, older patients present with higher GCS for a given injury, and as such, it is unclear if this substitution is advisable. Our objective was to compare the GCS deficit patterns between geriatric and adult patients presenting with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), as well as the diagnostic performance of the GCSm versus GCSt within the field triage criteria in these populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of patients ≥16 y in the National Trauma Data Bank 2007-2015. GCS deficit patterns were compared between adults (16-65) and geriatric patients (>65). Measures of diagnostic performance of GCSt≤13 versus GCSm≤5 criteria to predict trauma center need (TCN) were compared. RESULTS: In total, 4,480,185 patients were analyzed (28% geriatric). Geriatric patients more frequently presented with non-motor-only deficits than adults (16.4% versus 12.4%, P < 0.001), and these patients demonstrated higher severe TBI (40.3% versus 36.7%, P < 0.001) and craniotomy (5.8% versus 5.1%, P < 0.001) rates. GCSt was more sensitive and accurate in predicting TCN for geriatric patients and had lower rates of undertriage as compared to GCSm. CONCLUSIONS: Geriatric patients more frequently present with non-motor-only deficits after injury, and this is associated with severe head injury. Substitution of GCSm for GCSt would exacerbate undertriage in geriatric patients and, thus, the total GCS should be maintained for field triage in geriatric patients.
BACKGROUND: Trauma field triage matches injured patients to the appropriate level of care. Prior work suggests the Glasgow Coma Scale motor (GCSm) is as accurate as the total GCS (GCSt) and easier to use. However, older patients present with higher GCS for a given injury, and as such, it is unclear if this substitution is advisable. Our objective was to compare the GCS deficit patterns between geriatric and adult patients presenting with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), as well as the diagnostic performance of the GCSm versus GCSt within the field triage criteria in these populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of patients ≥16 y in the National Trauma Data Bank 2007-2015. GCS deficit patterns were compared between adults (16-65) and geriatric patients (>65). Measures of diagnostic performance of GCSt≤13 versus GCSm≤5 criteria to predict trauma center need (TCN) were compared. RESULTS: In total, 4,480,185 patients were analyzed (28% geriatric). Geriatric patients more frequently presented with non-motor-only deficits than adults (16.4% versus 12.4%, P < 0.001), and these patients demonstrated higher severe TBI (40.3% versus 36.7%, P < 0.001) and craniotomy (5.8% versus 5.1%, P < 0.001) rates. GCSt was more sensitive and accurate in predicting TCN for geriatric patients and had lower rates of undertriage as compared to GCSm. CONCLUSIONS: Geriatric patients more frequently present with non-motor-only deficits after injury, and this is associated with severe head injury. Substitution of GCSm for GCSt would exacerbate undertriage in geriatric patients and, thus, the total GCS should be maintained for field triage in geriatric patients.
Authors: Roger Chou; Annette M Totten; Nancy Carney; Spencer Dandy; Rongwei Fu; Sara Grusing; Miranda Pappas; Ngoc Wasson; Craig D Newgard Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2017-01-11 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: G C Velmahos; A Jindal; L S Chan; J A Murray; P Vassiliu; T V Berne; J Asensio; D Demetriades Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: C Healey; Turner M Osler; Frederick B Rogers; Mark A Healey; Laurent G Glance; Patrick D Kilgo; Steven R Shackford; J Wayne Meredith Journal: J Trauma Date: 2003-04
Authors: Mark Susman; Stephen M DiRusso; Thomas Sullivan; Donald Risucci; Peter Nealon; Sara Cuff; Adil Haider; Deborah Benzil Journal: J Trauma Date: 2002-08
Authors: Shannon N Acker; James T Ross; David A Partrick; Nicole A Nadlonek; Michael Bronsert; Denis D Bensard Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Ahmed Kashkoush; Jordan C Petitt; Husayn Ladhani; Vanessa P Ho; Michael L Kelly Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2021-10-07 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Yelena G Bodien; Alice Barra; Nancy R Temkin; Jason Barber; Brandon Foreman; Mary Vassar; Claudia Robertson; Sabrina R Taylor; Amy J Markowitz; Geoffrey T Manley; Joseph T Giacino; Brian L Edlow Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2021-12 Impact factor: 4.869