Explore the vast range of titles available.

To investigate the influence of various factors on the two outcome parameters “procedure - specific complication” (femoral head necrosis, infection, nonunion, femoral neck shortening, screw loosening, implant penetration) and “functional outcome” in patients with displaced and undisplaced femoral neck fracture treated by cannulated screw fixation. All cases of a femoral neck fracture, operated by cannulated screw fixation, in the period from December 2014 to December 2017 were included. The observation period of the included patients was 12 months. Information on their outcome was collected after evaluation of current x-ray images and on request from the responsible further treatment physician. Continuous data were presented as mean value ± standard deviation, categorical data as absolute and relative frequency. The effect of potential factors on endpoints was estimated with a multivariable logistic regression analysis and 95% confidence intervals calculated. The null hypothesis Odds Ratio = 1 was checked by the Wald test. The likelihood ratio test was used to test for deviation from linearity. The mean age of the 56 included patients was 72 years (36 min, 96 max), 44.5% (n = 25) were male and 55.5% (n = 25) female. The femoral neck fractures were classified as follows: Garden I: 73%, Garden II: 16%, Garden III: 11%, Pauwels I: 73%, Pauwels II: 21%, Pauwels III: 5%, 31-B1: 73%, 31-B2: 27%, 31-B3: 0%. The factor patient age showed a statistically significant influence on the outcome parameter procedure-specific complication. None of the remaining factors examined showed a statistically significant influence on both outcome parameters procedure-specific complication and functional outcome. 69% of the patients from age 80 onwards suffered a procedure-specific complication. A rate of 41% procedure-specific complications as an outcome parameter in trauma surgery shows a necessity for improvement. The increasing risk of procedure-specific complications for patients with a femoral neck fracture treated by cannulated screw fixation is associated with rising patient age. A more stable head-perserving operative method or an endoprosthetic procedure should be considered in high-risk patients (≥80 y.o.).

Background With the aging population, the number of geriatric trauma patients continues to rise, posing significant challenges for emergency care and trauma management. Structured trauma team activation (TTA) protocols aim to provide timely and adequate treatment for severely injured patients. However, evidence suggests that current triage criteria may inadequately address the specific needs of geriatric patients, potentially leading to undertriage and worse outcomes. Methods The prospective, multicentre observational cohort study analysed trauma team activation and triage practices for patients aged ≥ 70 years across 12 Level 1 trauma centres across rural and urban regions in Germany and Switzerland. Data were prospectively collected from December 2020 to February 2021, following the STROBE guidelines. Triage decisions were compared with the TAcTIC (Trauma Team Activation and Trauma/Injury Care) consensus criteria to assess undertriage and overtriage rates. Key outcomes included trauma team activation rates, injury severity, transport characteristics, and early mortality. Results Among 3,753 trauma patients, 1,371 (36.5%) were geriatric (≥ 70 years). Trauma team activation was significantly lower in the geriatric group (15.8%) compared to younger patients (31.8%), despite similar injury severity. Post-hoc analysis revealed that 53.8% of geriatric patients requiring trauma care were undertriaged. Head injuries (47.7%) and pelvic fractures (5.7%) were more common in geriatric patients in comparison to the younger cohort. Mortality within 48 h was more than three times as high in geriatric patients (1.8% vs. 0.5%). Conclusion A significant undertriage rate (53.8%) was identified among geriatric trauma patients, contributing to delayed care and increased mortality. Undertriage of geriatric trauma patients remains a critical issue, reflecting the insufficiency of current trauma activation protocols. Tailored triage criteria that even more consider age-related physiological differences, comorbidities, and frailty are urgently needed. Future updates to trauma guidelines should aim to reduce undertriage and improve outcomes for this vulnerable population. Clinical trial number Not applicable

Aim of the studyEmergency department thoracotomy (EDT) may be the last chance for survival in some severe thoracic trauma. This study investigates a representative collective with the aim to compare the findings in Europe to the international experience. Moreover, the influence of different levels of trauma care is investigated.MethodsAll emergency thoracotomies in patients with an ISS ≥ 9 from TR-DGU (2009–2014) within the first 60 min after arrival were identified. EDTs were identified separately, and mini thoracotomies and drainage systems were excluded.Results99,013 patients with sufficient data were observed. 1736 (1.8%) received thoracotomy during their hospital stay. 887 patients had a thoracotomy within the first hour in the emergency department (ED). 52.5% were treated in supraregional trauma centers (STC), 36.4% in regional (RTC) and 11.0% in local trauma centers (LTC). The mortality rates were 39.4% (STC), 20.9% (RTC) and 20.8% (LTC). The overall mortality rate showed no significant differences for blunt (28.2%) and penetrating trauma (31.3%). In case of cardiac arrest in the ED, a survival rate of 4.8% for blunt trauma and 20.7% for penetrating trauma was determined if EDT was carried out. Those patients showed a higher rate in severe thoracic organ injuries due to penetrating trauma but less extrathoracic injuries.ConclusionJust over half of EDTs were performed in STC. Emergency room resuscitation followed by EDT had survival rates of 4.8% and 20.7% for blunt and penetrating trauma patients, respectively.

Contrast-enhanced whole-body computed tomography (also called “pan-scanning”) is considered to be a conclusive diagnostic tool for major trauma. We sought to determine the accuracy of this method, focusing on the reliability of negative results. Between July 2006 and December 2008, a total of 982 patients with suspected severe injuries underwent single-pass pan-scanning at a metropolitan trauma centre. The findings of the scan were independently evaluated by two reviewers who analyzed the injuries to five body regions and compared the results to a synopsis of hospital charts, subsequent imaging and interventional procedures. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the pan-scan for each body region, and we assessed the residual risk of missed injuries that required surgery or critical care. A total of 1756 injuries were detected in the 982 patients scanned. Of these, 360 patients had an Injury Severity Score greater than 15. The median length of follow-up was 39 (interquartile range 7–490) days, and 474 patients underwent a definitive reference test. The sensitivity of the initial pan-scan was 84.6% for head and neck injuries, 79.6% for facial injuries, 86.7% for thoracic injuries, 85.7% for abdominal injuries and 86.2% for pelvic injuries. Specificity was 98.9% for head and neck injuries, 99.1% for facial injuries, 98.9% for thoracic injuries, 97.5% for abdominal injuries and 99.8% for pelvic injuries. In total, 62 patients had 70 missed injuries, indicating a residual risk of 6.3% (95% confidence interval 4.9%–8.0%). We found that the positive results of trauma pan-scans are conclusive but negative results require subsequent confirmation. The pan-scan algorithms reduce, but do not eliminate, the risk of missed injuries, and they should not replace close monitoring and clinical follow-up of patients with major trauma.

Purpose Delayed diagnosed injuries (DDI) in severely injured patients are an essential problem faced by emergency staff. Aim of the current study was to analyse incidence and type of DDI in a large trauma cohort. Furthermore, factors predicting DDI were investigated to create a score to identify patients at risk for DDI. Methods Multiply injured patients admitted between 2011 and 2020 and documented in the TraumaRegister DGU® were analysed. Primary admitted patients with severe injuries and/or intensive care who survived at least 24 h were included. The prevalence, type and severity of DDI were described. Through multivariate logistic regression analysis, risk factors for DDI were identified. Results were used to create a ‘Risk for Delayed Diagnoses’ (RIDD) score. Results Of 99,754 multiply injured patients, 9,175 (9.2%) had 13,226 injuries first diagnosed on ICU. Most common DDI were head injuries (35.8%), extremity injuries (33.3%) and thoracic injuries (19.7%). Patients with DDI had a higher ISS, were more frequently unconscious, in shock, required more blood transfusions, and stayed longer on ICU and in hospital. Multivariate analysis identified seven factors indicating a higher risk for DDI (OR from 1.2 to 1.9). The sum of these factors gives the RIDD score, which expresses the individual risk for a DDI ranging from 3.6% (0 points) to 24.8% (6 + points). Conclusion DDI are present in a sounding number of trauma patients. The reported results highlight the importance of a highly suspicious and thorough physical examination in the trauma room. The introduced RIDD score might help to identify patients at high risk for DDI. A tertiary survey should be implemented to minimise delayed diagnosed or even missed injuries.

The war in Ukraine and the medical treatment of the wounded in hospitals in Germany has now represented a challenge for more than 15 months. The majority of trauma patients were distributed via the general holding center (GMLZ) at the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) by the cloverleaf concept and the trauma networks. Initially, numerous offers of assistance were promoted with great solidarity. For documentation of the current motivation situation and also for identification of the potential for improvement, a 2-stage survey of senior physicians in the organized and certified hospitals in the trauma networks was carried out. An online survey of senior physicians of the trauma network hospitals was carried out with a semistructured written questionnaire in December 2022 and a follow-up survey during the Trauma Network Meeting (TNT) Congress in September 2023 in Frankfurt. Of the questionnaires 113 could be evaluated in December 2022 and 70 completed questionnaires in September 2023. The answers came from national trauma centers (ÜTZ), regional trauma centers (RTZ) and local trauma centers (LTZ) each with approximately one third. On average 2.7 patients were treated in all participating hospitals up to December and up to September no more than 5 in more than half of the hospitals overall. The main challenges for all participants at both points in time were the long hospital stay, the demanding pathogen status and sometimes unclarified or not completely covered reimbursement of costs. Nevertheless, more than 80% of the specialist departments received backing from their hospital sponsors as well as their personnel for the continuing treatment of the wounded from Ukraine. The medical and professional challenges in the treatment of the wounded from Ukraine are, as expected, characterized by the demanding injury patterns of the musculoskeletal system and the colonization with multidrug-resistant pathogens. This results in a long course of treatment, where the remuneration does not always cover the costs. Despite these challenges the solidarity in the hospitals of the trauma networks is unbroken. Simultaneously, there are numerous possibilities for improvement in order to enhance the prerequisites for future comparable humanitarian assistance jointly with politics.

PurposeIn severely injured patients with multiple rib fractures the beneficial effect of surgical stabilization is still unknown. The existing literature shows divergent results and especially the indication and the right timing of an operation are subject of a broad discussion. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of a surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) on the outcome in a multi-center database with special regard to the duration of ventilation, intensive care and overall hospital stay.MethodsData from the TraumaRegister DGU® collected between 2008 and 2017 were used to evaluate patients over 16 years with severe rib fractures (AIS ≥ 3). In addition to the basic comparison a matched pair analysis of 395 pairs was carried out in order to find differences and to increase comparability.ResultsIn total 483 patients received an operative treatment and 29,447 were treated conservatively. SSRF was associated with a significantly lower mortality rate (7.6% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.008) but a longer ventilation time and longer stay as well as in the intensive care unit (ICU) as the overall hospital stay. Both matched pair groups showed a good or very good neurological outcome according to the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) in 4 of 5 cases. Contrary to the existing recommendations most of the patients were not operated within 48 h.ConclusionsIn our data set, obviously most of the patients were not treated according to the recent literature and showed a delay in the time for operative care of well over 48 h. This may lead to an increased rate of complications and a longer stay at the ICU and the hospital in general. Despite of these findings patients with operative treatment show a significant lower mortality rate.

Introduction:Trauma registries are a crucial component of trauma systems, as they could be utilized to perform a benchmarking of quality of care and enable research in a critical but important area of health care. The aim of this study is to compare the performance of two national trauma systems: Germany (TraumaRegister DGU ®,TR-DGU) and Israel (Israeli National Trauma Registry,INTR) in a retrospective analysis.Method:Patients from both registries treated during 2015-2019 with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 16 points were included. Patient demographics, pre-hospital care, hospital treatment, and outcome were compared.Results:Data were available from 12,585 Israeli patients and 55,660 German patients. Age and sex distribution were comparable, and road traffic accidents were the most prevalent cause of injuries. The ISS of German patients was higher (ISS 24 versus 20), more patients were treated in an intensive care unit (92% versus 32%), and mortality was higher(19.4% versus 9.5%) as well.Conclusion:Despite similar inclusion criteria (ISS ≥ 16), remarkable differences between the two national datasets were observed. Most likely, this was caused by different recruitment strategies of both registries like trauma team activation and the need for intensive care in TR- DGU. More detailed analyses are needed to uncover similarities and differences between both trauma systems.

Immobilization of fractures and dislocations is a basic technique in orthopedic trauma surgery care. The orthopedic surgeon should be familiar with the various materials, techniques and possible complications. Despite other techniques, the classical white plaster cast remains an integral part of orthopedic trauma surgery care. The application of such a cast must be learned as failure to observe the basic principles can result in harm to the patient. In many hospitals, the application of a plaster cast is delegated to the nursing staff according to the physician's instructions. As a result, many young medical colleagues lack the knowledge of how to apply a plaster cast. In addition to the treatment of fractures, immobilization after dislocation, inflammation and ligamentous injuries are some of the areas of application. In this article the application of a plaster cast is described based on a case study, from the indications to the execution and possible complications.

BackgroundOpen fractures are orthopaedic emergencies that carry a high risk for infection, non-union and soft tissue complications. Evidence-based treatment is impeded by the lack of high-quality evidence-based studies. The aim of this investigation was to elucidate the current practice of open fracture management in Germany and to determine major differences in treatment.MethodsSurgeons were asked to complete an online questionnaire consisting of 45 items developed by an expert consensus. The first part covered questions on general principles of open fracture management. The second part included questions on soft tissue management, the preferred method of initial surgical stabilisation, microbiological testing, employment of pulsatile lavage and local antibiotics, antibiotic regimen, second-look operations, and blood testing.ResultsOf 653 respondents, 364 (65 %) completed the first part and 314 (48 %) completed the second part of the online survey. 55 % answered that a standard operating procedure for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with open fractures exists in their hospital. Only 25 % leave pre-hospitalisation applied dressings intact until arrival of the patient in the operating room, and 40 % make this decision depending on information provided by pre-hospitalisation emergency personnel. 84 % participants exclude the use of antibiotic-coated implants in the treatment of open fractures. The favoured stabilisation method in Gustilo type I fractures is definitive internal osteosynthesis and primary wound closure for 61 % of respondents. In Gustilo type II (74 %) and type III fractures (93 %), temporary external fixation is preferred. High-pressure pulsatile lavage is used by 22 % responding surgeons in Gustilo type I fractures, 53 % for type II fractures and 67 % for type III fractures.ConclusionsOpen fracture management differs considerably among surgeons in Germany. Further studies are needed to deliver high-quality evidence concerning primary fracture stabilisation, soft tissue management and second-look operations. Existing evidence-based recommendations for general treatment, antibiotic prophylaxis and soft tissue management should be followed more strictly in clinical practice.