Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26573899›Full record

ArticleInjury2016

Failure to rescue in trauma: Coming to terms with the second term.

Daniel N Holena, Emily Earl-Royal, M Kit Delgado, Carrie A Sims, Jose L Pascual, Jesse Y Hsu, Brendan G Carr, Patrick M Reilly, Douglas Wiebe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Injury, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Failure to rescue in surgical patients: A review for acute care surgeons.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2019
    Review
  4. Article
  5. A metric of our own: Failure to rescue after trauma.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2017
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Surgical rescue: The next pillar of acute care surgery.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2017
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Daniel N HolenaDivision of Traumatology, Surgical Critical Care and Emergency Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; The Leonard Davis Institute, Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Electronic address: Daniel.holena@uphs.upenn.edu.
Emily Earl-RoyalPerelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
M Kit DelgadoCenter for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; The Leonard Davis Institute, Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Carrie A SimsDivision of Traumatology, Surgical Critical Care and Emergency Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Jose L PascualDivision of Traumatology, Surgical Critical Care and Emergency Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Jesse Y HsuCenter for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; The Leonard Davis Institute, Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Brendan G CarrThe Leonard Davis Institute, Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Department of Emergency Medicine, Jefferson University School of Philadelphia Medicine, PA, United States.
Patrick M ReillyDivision of Traumatology, Surgical Critical Care and Emergency Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Douglas WiebeCenter for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; The Leonard Davis Institute, Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.

Funding

Enabling Medical Research Growth in Emergency MedicineK12HL109009 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI KIMMEL, STEPHEN E. · 2011 to 2015
$3.4M
NHLBI NIH HHS K12 HL 109009NHLBI NIH HHS K12 HL109009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe failure to rescue (FTR) rate is the probability of death after a major complication and was defined in elective surgical cohorts. In elective surgery, the precedence rate (proportion of deaths preceded by major complications) approaches 100%, but recent studies in trauma report rates of only 20-25%. We hypothesised that use of high quality data would result precedence rates in higher than those derived from national datasets, and we further sought to characterise the nature of those deaths not preceded by major complications.

methodsProspectively collected data from 2006 to 2010 from a single level I trauma centre were used. Patients age >16 years with AIS ≥2 who survived beyond the trauma bay were included. Complications, mortality, FTR, and precedence rates were calculated. Chart abstraction was performed for registry deaths without recorded complications to verify the absence of complications and determine the cause of death, after which outcomes were re-calculated.

resultsA total of 8004 patients were included (median age 41 (IQR 25-75), 71% male, 82% blunt, median ISS 10 (IQR 5-18)). Using registry data the precedence rate was 55%, with 132/293 (45%) deaths occurring without antecedent major complications. On chart abstraction, 11/132 (8%) patients recorded in the registry as having no complication prior to death were found to have major complications. Complication and FTR rates after chart abstraction were statistically significantly different than those derived from registry data alone (complications 16.5% vs. 16.3, FTR 12.3 vs.13, p=0.001), but this difference was unlikely to be clinically meaningful. Patients dying without complications predominantly (87%) had neurologic causes of demise.

conclusionsUse of data with near-complete ascertainment of complications results in precedence rates much higher than those from national datasets. Patients dying without precedent complications at our centre largely succumbed to progression of neurologic injury. Attempts to use FTR to compare quality between centres should be limited to high quality data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III. RETROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY: Outcomes.

Indexed as

Hospital MortalityTrauma CentersAdultAgedComorbidityElective Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, TheoreticalResuscitationRetrospective StudiesTreatment FailureUnited StatesFailure to rescueMethodologyOutcomes

Identifiers

PMID26573899
PMCPMC4698021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.