Outcomes and Predictors of Mortality in Neurosurgical Patients at Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital

Background:

Knowing the scope of neurosurgical disease at Mbarara Hospital is critical for infrastructure planning, education and training. In this study, we aim to evaluate the neurosurgical outcomes and identify predictors of mortality in order to potentiate platforms for more effective interventions and inform future research efforts at Mbarara Hospital.

Methods:

This is retrospective chart review including patients of all ages with a neurosurgical disease or injury presenting to Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital (MRRH) between January 2012 to September 2015. Descriptive statistics were presented. A univariate analysis was used to obtain the odds ratios of mortality and 95% confidence intervals. Predictors of mortality were determined using multivariate logistic regression model.

Results:

A total of 1876 charts were reviewed. Of these, 1854 (had complete data and were?) were included in the analysis. The overall mortality rate was 12.75%; the mortality rates among all persons who underwent a neurosurgical procedure was 9.72%, and was 13.68% among those who did not undergo a neurosurgical procedure. Over 50% of patients were between 19 and 40 years old and the majority of were males (76.10%). The overall median length of stay was 5 days. Of all neurosurgical admissions, 87% were trauma patients. In comparison to mild head injury, closed head injury and intracranial hematoma patients were 5 (95% CI: 3.77, 8.26) and 2.5 times (95% CI: 1.64,3.98) more likely to die respectively. Procedure and diagnostic imaging were independent negative predictors of mortality (P <0.05). While age, ICU admission, admission GCS were positive predictors of mortality (P <0.05).

Conclusions:

The majority of hospital admissions were TBI patients, with RTIs being the most common mechanism of injury. Age, ICU admission, admission GCS, diagnostic imaging and undergoing surgery were independent predictors of mortality. Going forward, further exploration of patient characteristics is necessary to fully describe mortality outcomes and implement resource appropriate interventions that ultimately improve morbidity and mortality.

Vascular access, fluid resuscitation, and blood transfusion in pediatric trauma.

Trauma care in the general population has largely become protocol-driven, with an emphasis on fast and efficient treatment, good team communication at all levels of care including prehospital care, initial resuscitation, intensive care, and rehabilitation. Most available literature on trauma care has focused on adults, allowing the potential to apply concepts from adult care to pediatric care. But there remain issues that will always be specific to pediatric patients that may not translate from adults. Several new devices such as intraosseous (IO) needle systems and techniques such as ultrasonography to cannulate central and peripheral veins have become available for integration into our pre-existing trauma care system for children. This review will focus specifically on the latest techniques and evidence available for establishing intravenous access, rational approaches to fluid resuscitation, and blood product transfusion in the pediatric trauma patient.

Validation of ICDPIC software injury severity scores using a large regional trauma registry.

BACKGROUND: Administrative or quality improvement registries may or may not contain the elements needed for investigations by trauma researchers. International Classification of Diseases Program for Injury Categorisation (ICDPIC), a statistical program available through Stata, is a powerful tool that can extract injury severity scores from ICD-9-CM codes. We conducted a validation study for use of the ICDPIC in trauma research. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort validation study of 40,418 patients with injury using a large regional trauma registry. ICDPIC-generated AIS scores for each body region were compared with trauma registry AIS scores (gold standard) in adult and paediatric populations. A separate analysis was conducted among patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) comparing the ICDPIC tool with ICD-9-CM embedded severity codes. Performance in characterising overall injury severity, by the ISS, was also assessed. RESULTS: The ICDPIC tool generated substantial correlations in thoracic and abdominal trauma (weighted κ 0.87-0.92), and in head and neck trauma (weighted κ 0.76-0.83). The ICDPIC tool captured TBI severity better than ICD-9-CM code embedded severity and offered the advantage of generating a severity value for every patient (rather than having missing data). Its ability to produce an accurate severity score was consistent within each body region as well as overall. CONCLUSIONS: The ICDPIC tool performs well in classifying injury severity and is superior to ICD-9-CM embedded severity for TBI. Use of ICDPIC demonstrates substantial efficiency and may be a preferred tool in determining injury severity for large trauma datasets, provided researchers understand its limitations and take caution when examining smaller trauma datasets.