Association of Statewide Implementation of the Prehospital Traumatic Brain Injury Treatment Guidelines With Patient Survival Following Traumatic Brain Injury: The Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care (EPIC) Study

Abstract

Importance: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a massive public health problem. While evidence-based guidelines directing the prehospital treatment of TBI have been promulgated, to our knowledge, no studies have assessed their association with survival.

Objective: To evaluate the association of implementing the nationally vetted, evidence-based, prehospital treatment guidelines with outcomes in moderate, severe, and critical TBI.

Design, setting, and participants: The Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care (EPIC) Study included more than 130 emergency medical services systems/agencies throughout Arizona. This was a statewide, multisystem, intention-to-treat study using a before/after controlled design with patients with moderate to critically severe TBI (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Barell Matrix-Type 1 and/or Abbreviated Injury Scale Head region severity ≥3) transported to trauma centers between January 1, 2007, and June 30, 2015. Data were analyzed between October 25, 2017, and February 22, 2019.

Interventions: Implementation of the prehospital TBI guidelines emphasizing avoidance/treatment of hypoxia, prevention/correction of hyperventilation, and avoidance/treatment of hypotension.

Main outcomes and measures: Primary: survival to hospital discharge; secondary: survival to hospital admission.

Results: Of the included patients, the median age was 45 years, 14 666 (67.1%) were men, 7181 (32.9%) were women; 16 408 (75.1% ) were white, 1400 (6.4%) were Native American, 743 (3.4% ) were Black, 237 (1.1%) were Asian, and 2791 (12.8%) were other race/ethnicity. Of the included patients, 21 852 met inclusion criteria for analysis (preimplementation phase [P1]: 15 228; postimplementation [P3]: 6624). The primary analysis (P3 vs P1) revealed an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.06 (95% CI, 0.93-1.21; P = .40) for survival to hospital discharge. The aOR was 1.70 (95% CI, 1.38-2.09; P < .001) for survival to hospital admission. Among the severe injury cohorts (but not moderate or critical), guideline implementation was significantly associated with survival to discharge (Regional Severity Score-Head 3-4: aOR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.52-2.72; P < .001; Injury Severity Score 16-24: aOR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.07-2.48; P = .02). This was also true for survival to discharge among the severe, intubated subgroups (Regional Severity Score-Head 3-4: aOR, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.65-5.98; P < .001; Injury Severity Score 16-24: aOR, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.19-11.34; P = .02).

Conclusions and relevance: Statewide implementation of the prehospital TBI guidelines was not associated with significant improvement in overall survival to hospital discharge (across the entire, combined moderate to critical injury spectrum). However, adjusted survival doubled among patients with severe TBI and tripled in the severe, intubated cohort. Furthermore, guideline implementation was significantly associated with survival to hospital admission. These findings support the widespread implementation of the prehospital TBI treatment guidelines.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01339702.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Drs Spaite, Bobrow, Barnhart, Chikani, Gaither, Sherrill, Adelson, Viscusi, and Hu received support from the NIH grant via their university/academic appointments.

Figures

Figure 1.. Enrollment Tree

EMS indicates emergency medical services; EPIC, Excellence In Prehospital Injury Care study; P1, study phase 1 (preimplementation phase); P2, study phase 2 (training run-in phase; for each EMS agency, time from initiation to completion of training); P3, study phase 3 (postimplementation phase); TBI, traumatic brain injury.

Figure 2.. Primary Analysis: Adjusted Survival

Postintervention adjusted odds of survival to hospital discharge or admission for the moderate (Injury Severity Score [ISS] of 1-14), severe (Regional Severity Score–Head of 3 or 4; ISS of 16-24), and critical (Regional Severity Score-Head of 5 or 6; ISS of 25-75) injury cohorts. Logistic regression was used when there were at least 200 patients with the event (eg, survived to discharge) and 200 without (eg, did not survive to discharge). Number of events/number of subjects in each subgroup: Head Injury Severity 1-2: survival to discharge 2072 of 2090; survival to hospital admission (SHA) 2084 of 2090; Head Injury Severity 3-4: survival to discharge 14 754 of 15 147; SHA 15 038 of 15 147; Head Injury Severity 5-6: survival to discharge 1885 of 4444; SHA, 3587 of 4444; ISS 1 to 14: survival to discharge, 7757 of 7826; SHA, 7801/7826; ISS 16 to 24: survival to discharge, 7115 of 7274; SHA, 7241/7274; ISS ≥25: survival to discharge, 3937/6745; SHA, 5785/6745. aOR indicates adjusted odds ratio; NA, not applicable owing to numbers being too small for adjusted analysis. aIn comparisons that did not meet the criteria of at least 200 patients with the event and 200 without, Firth penalized-likelihood logistic regression was used.

Figure 3.. Adjusted Analysis of Survival and Survival to Hospital Admission by Severity Cohorts in Patients with Positive-Pressure Ventilation (PPV)/Intubation

Postintervention adjusted odds of survival to hospital discharge or admission, by airway intervention category, for the severe (Regional Severity Score–Head of 3 or 4; Injury Severity Score [ISS] of 16-24) and critical injury cohorts (Regional Severity Score–Head of 5 or 6; Injury Severity Score of 25-75). The moderate severity category analyses (Regional Severity Score-Head of 1 or 2; ISS of 1-14) are not shown owing to the very small number of deaths in these cohorts, preventing meaningful/stable regression model results. Logistic regression was used when there were at least 200 patients with the event (eg, survived to discharge) and 200 without (eg, did not survive to discharge). For PPV, inclusion criteria were all patients with active ventilation whether basic (bag-valve mask) or advanced airway (supraglottic/extraglottic airway or endotracheal intubation). Number of events/number of subjects in each subgroup: PPV Head Injury Severity 3-4: survival to discharge, 1618 of 1842; SHA 1741 of 1842; PPV Head Injury Severity 5-6: survival to discharge, 771 of 2,992; SHA, 2149 of 2992; PPV ISS 16 to 24: survival to discharge, 751 of 822; SHA, 793 of 822; PPV ISS ≥25: survival to discharge, 1359/3770; SHA, 2829/3770; endotracheal intubation (ETI) Head Injury Severity 3-4: survival to discharge 1257/1457; SHA 1364/1457; ETI Head Injury Severity 5-6: survival to discharge 603 of 2402; SHA 1689 of 2402; ETI ISS 16 to 24: survival to discharge, 586 of 647; SHA, 620 of 647; ETI ISS ≥25: survival to discharge, 1055 of 3024; SHA, 2224/3024. aOR indicates adjusted odds ratio. aIn comparisons that did not meet the criteria of at least 200 patients with the event and 200 without, Firth penalized-likelihood logistic regression was used.