Longer-term quality of life following major trauma: age only significantly affects outcome after the age of 80 years

Thomas Gross, Sabrina Morell, Felix Amsler, Thomas Gross, Sabrina Morell, Felix Amsler

Abstract

Aim: Against the background of conflicting data on the topic, this study aimed to determine the differences in longer-term patient outcomes following major trauma with regard to age.

Materials and methods: A prospective trauma center survey of survivors of trauma (≥16 years) was carried out employing a New Injury Severity Score (NISS) ≥8 to investigate the influence of age on working capacity and several outcome scores, such as the trauma medical outcomes study Short Form-36 (physical component [PCS] and mental component [MCS]), the Euro Quality of Life (EuroQoL), or the Trauma Outcome Profile (TOP) at least 1 year following injury. Chi square tests, t-tests, and Pearson correlations were used as univariate; stepwise regression as multivariate analysis. Significance was set at p<0.05.

Results: In all, 718 major trauma patients (53.4±19.4 years; NISS 18.4±9.2) participated in the study. Multivariate analysis showed only low associations of patient or trauma characteristics with longer-term outcome scores, highest for the Injury Severity Score of the extremities with the PCS (R2=0.08) or the working capacity of employed patients (n=383; R2=0.04). For age, overall associations were even lower (best with the PCS, R2=0.04) or could not be revealed at all (TOP or MCS). Subgroup analysis with regard to decennia revealed the age effect to be mainly attributable to patients aged ≥80, who presented with a significantly worse outcome compared to younger people in all overall and physical component scores (p<0.001). In patients under 80 years an association of age was only found for EuroQoL (R2=0.01) and the PCS (R2=0.03).

Conclusion: Given the small impact of age on the longer-term outcomes of major trauma patients, at least up to the age of 80 years, resuscitation as well as rehabilitation strategies should be adapted accordingly.

Keywords: age; longer term; major trauma; outcome; quality of life; working capacity.

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of selection of eligible patients. Abbreviations: NISS, New Injury Severity Score; GOS, Glasgow Outcome Scale.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Longer-term outcomes in single scores for different age groups. Abbreviations: SF-36, trauma medical outcomes study Short Form-36 (physical and mental sum component); EQ-5D, Euro Quality of Life Group health-related quality of life on five dimensions; GOS, Glasgow Outcome Scale; TOP, Trauma Outcome Profile (physical and mental component); QOLIBRI, Quality of Life after Brain Injury.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Longer-term outcomes in single scores for different age groups. Abbreviations: SF-36, trauma medical outcomes study Short Form-36 (physical and mental sum component); EQ-5D, Euro Quality of Life Group health-related quality of life on five dimensions; GOS, Glasgow Outcome Scale; TOP, Trauma Outcome Profile (physical and mental component); QOLIBRI, Quality of Life after Brain Injury.

References

    1. Hammer PM, Storey AC, Bell T, et al. Improving geriatric trauma outcomes: a small step toward a big problem. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2016;81(1):162–167.
    1. Follin A, Jacqmin S, Chhor V, et al. Tree-based algorithm for prehospital triage of polytrauma patients. Injury. 2016;47(7):1555–1561.
    1. Caterino JM, Brown NV, Hamilton MW, et al. Effect of geriatric-specific trauma triage criteria on outcomes in injured older adults: a statewide retrospective cohort study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2016;64(10):1944–1951.
    1. Shipman KE, Doyle A, Arden H, Jones T, Gittoes NJ. Development of fracture liaison services: what have we learned? Injury. 2017;48(Suppl 7):S4–S9.
    1. Milte R, Crotty M. Musculoskeletal health, frailty and functional decline. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2014;28(3):395–410.
    1. Brooks SE, Peetz AB. Evidence-based care of geriatric trauma patients. Surg Clin North Am. 2017;97(5):1157–1174.
    1. Rainer TH, Yeung HH, Gabbe BJ, et al. A comparison of functional outcome in patients sustaining major trauma: a multicentre, prospective, international study. PLoS One. 2014;9(8):e103396.
    1. Gunning A, van Heijl M, van Wessem K, Leenen L. The association of patient and trauma characteristics with the health-related quality of life in a Dutch trauma population. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017;25(1):41.
    1. Fayers PM, Hand DJ, Bjordal K, Groenvold M. Causal indicators in quality of life research. Qual Life Res. 1997;6(5):393–406.
    1. Poolman RW, Swiontkowski MF, Fairbank JCT, Schemitsch EH, Sprague S, de Vet HCW. Outcome instruments: rationale for their use. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(Suppl 3):41–49.
    1. Attenberger C, Amsler F, Gross T. Clinical evaluation of the Trauma Outcome Profile (TOP) in the longer-term follow-up of polytrauma patients. Injury. 2012;43(9):1566–1574.
    1. Holbrook TL, Anderson DJ, Sieber WJ, Browner BD, Hoyt DB. Outcome after major trauma – 12-month and 18-month follow-up results from the Trauma Recovery Project. J Trauma. 1999;46(5):765–773.
    1. van Delft-Schreurs CCHM, van Son MAC, de Jongh MAC, Lansink KWW, de Vries J, Verhofstad MHJ. The relationship between physical and psychological complaints and quality of life in severely injured patients. Injury. 2017;48(9):1978–1984.
    1. Sluys K, Häggmark T, Iselius L. Outcome and quality of life 5 years after major trauma. J Trauma. 2005;59(1):223–232.
    1. Kiely JM, Brasel KJ, Weidner KL, Guse CE, Weigelt JA. Predicting quality of life six months after traumatic injury. J Trauma. 2006;61(4):791–798.
    1. Soberg HL, Bautz-Holter E, Roise O, Finset A. Long term multidimensional functional consequences of severe multiple injuries two years after trauma: a prospective longitudinal cohort study. J Trauma. 2007;62(2):461–470.
    1. Newgard CD, Richardson D, Holmes JF, et al. Physiologic field triage criteria for identifying seriously injured older adults. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2014;18(4):461–470.
    1. Sutherland AG, Johnston AT. The new injury severity score: better prediction of functional recovery after musculoskeletal injury. Value Health. 2006;9(1):24–27.
    1. American College of Surgeons Committee . Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) Student Course Manual. Vol. 9. Chicago, USA: American College of Surgeons; 2012.
    1. Neugebauer EAM, Waydhas C, Lendemans S, Rixen D, Eikermann M, Pohlemann T. The treatment of patients with severe and multiple traumatic injuries. Dtsc Arztebl Int. 2012;109(6):102–108.
    1. Jennett B, Bond M. Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. Lancet. 1975;1(7905):480–484.
    1. Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment and prognosis of coma after head injury. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1976;34(1–4):45–55.
    1. Sartorius D, Manach YL, David JS, et al. Mechanism, Glasgow coma scale, age, and arterial pressure (MGAP): a new prehospital triage to predict mortality in trauma patients. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(3):831–837.
    1. Le Gall JR, Lemeshow S, Saulnier F. A new simplified acute physiology score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study. JAMA. 1993;270(24):2957–2963.
    1. Gennarelli T. The Abbreviated Injury Scale – 1990 Revision. Des Plaines, IL: American Association for the Advancemnent of Automotive Medicine (AAAM); 1990.
    1. Baker SP, O’Neill B, Haddon W, Long WB. The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care. J Trauma. 1974;14(3):187–196.
    1. Lefering R. Ein neuer Prognose-Score im TraumaRegister DGU (RISC II) [A new prognostic score in the TraumaRegister DGU (RISC II)] Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Mitteilungen und Nachrichten. 2015:80–82. German.
    1. Szende A, Williams A. Measuring Self-Reported Population Health: An International Perspective Based on EQ-5D. Budapest: Springer Med Publishing Ltd; 2004.
    1. Bullinger M. German translation and psychometric testing of the SF-36 health survey: preliminary results from the IQOLA project. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41(10):1359–1366.
    1. Pirente N, Gregor A, Bouillon B, Neugebauer E. Lebensqualität schwerstverletzter Patienten ein Jahr nach dem Trauma [Quality of life of severely injured patients one year after trauma. A matched-pair study with a healthy control group] Unfallchirurg. 2001;104(1):57–63. German.
    1. von Steinbuechel N, Wilson L, Gibbons H, et al. Quality of life after brain injury (QOLIBRI): scale validity and correlates of quality of life. J Neurotrauma. 2010;27(7):1157–1165.
    1. von Steinbuechel N, Wilson L, Gibbons H, et al. Quality of life after brain injury (QOLIBRI): scale development and metric properties. J Neurotrauma. 2010;27(7):1167–1185.
    1. Zwingmann J, Hagelschuer P, Langenmair E, et al. Lower health-related quality of life in polytrauma patients: long-term follow-up after over 5 years. Medicine. 2016;95(19):e3515.
    1. Harris IAF, Young JMP, Rae HM, Jalaludin BBP, Solomon MJF. Predictors of general health after major trauma. J Trauma. 2008;64(4):969–974.
    1. Soberg HL, Finset A, Bautz-Holter E, Sandvik L, Roise O. Return to work after severe multiple injuries: a multidimensional approach on status 1 and 2 years postinjury. J Trauma. 2007;62(2):471–481.
    1. Gross T, Attenberger C, Huegli RW, Amsler F. Factors associated with reduced longer-term capacity to work in patients following polytrauma – a Swiss trauma center experience. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;211(1):81–91.
    1. van der Sluis CK, Klasen HJ, Eisma WH, ten Duis HJ. Major trauma in young and old: what is the difference? J Trauma. 1996;40(1):78–82.
    1. Soberg HL, Roe C, Brunborg C, von Steinbuechel N, Andelic N. The Norwegian version of the QOLIBRI – a study of metric properties based on a 12 month follow-up of persons with traumatic brain injury. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017;15:14.
    1. Ellert U, Bellach BM. Der SF-36 im Bundes-Gesundheitssurvey – Beschreibung einer aktuellen Normstichprobe. Gesundheitswesen. 1999;61(Sonderheft 2):S184–S190. German.
    1. Joseph B, Pandit V, Zangbar B, et al. Superiority of frailty over age in predicting outcomes among geriatric trauma patients: a prospective analysis. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(8):766–772.
    1. Biffl WL, Biffl SE. Rehabilitation of the geriatric surgical patient: predicting needs and optimizing outcomes. Surg Clin North Am. 2015;95(1):173–190.
    1. Sewalt CA, Wiegers EJA, Venema E, Lingsma HF. Letter to the Editor regarding the article: “identifying pre-hospital factors associated with outcome for major trauma patients in a regional trauma network: an exploratory study”. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017;25(1):113.
    1. Heaney JB, Schroll R, Turney J, et al. Implications of the Trauma Quality Improvement Project inclusion of nonsurvivable injuries in performance benchmarking. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017;83(4):617–621.
    1. Weninger P, Aldrian S, Koenig F, Vecsei V, Nau T. Functional recovery at a minimum of 2 years after multiple injury – development of an outcome score. J Trauma. 2008;65(4):799–808.
    1. MacKenzie EJ, McCarthy ML, Ditunno JF, et al. Using the SF-36 for characterizing outcome after multiple trauma involving head injury. J Trauma. 2002;52(3):527–534.
    1. O’Cathain A, Knowles E, Nicholl J. Testing survey methodology to measure patients’ experiences and views of the emergency and urgent care system: telephone versus postal survey. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10(1):52.
    1. Edwards PJ, Roberts I, Clarke MJ, et al. Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;3:MR000008.
    1. Zelle BA, Bhandari M, Sanchez AI, Probst C, Pape HC. Loss of follow-up in orthopaedic trauma: is 80% follow-up still acceptable? J Orthop Trauma. 2013;27(3):177–181.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa