Citation

Moren AM, Waschmann M, Martin MJ, McIntyre RCJ, Kaplan LJ. Am. J. Surg. 2022; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.amjsurg.2022.03.031

PMID

35397922

Abstract

BACKGROUND: During the pandemic, hospitals implemented disaster plans to conserve resources while maintaining patient care. It was unclear how these plans impacted injury care and trauma surgeons. STUDY DESIGN: A 16 question survey assessing COVID-related hospital policy and resource allocation pre-COVID-19 peak (March), and a 19 question post-peak (June) survey was distributed to Trauma/Critical Care attending's via social media and the Western Trauma Association member email list.

RESULTS: There were 120 pre- and 134 post-peak respondents. Most (95%) altered trauma PPE components, a nd 67% noted changes in their admission population pre-peak while 80% did so post-peak. Penetrating injury increased 56% at Level 1 centers and 27% at Level 2 centers. Altered ICU and transfusion criteria were noted with 25% relocating TBI patients, 17% revised rib fracture admission criteria, and 23% adjusted transfusion practices. Importantly, 12% changed their massive transfusion protocol, with 11% reducing the symptomatic transfusion threshold from 7 g/dL to 6 g/dL. Half (50%) disclosed impediments to patient care including PPE shortages and COVID test-related procedural delay (Fig. 2). While only 14% felt their institution was overwhelmed by COVID, the vast majority (81%) shared durable concerns about personal health and safety.

CONCLUSIONS: Disparate approaches to COVID-19 preparedness and response characterize survey respondent facility actions. These disparities, especially between Level 1 and Level 2 centers, represent opportunities for the trauma community to coordinate best-practice planning and implementation in light of future consequence infection or pandemic care.

Language: en

Keywords

Trauma; Disaster preparedness; COVID-19; Critical care; Resources