Methods: This was a post-hoc analysis of the Pan Asian Resuscitation Outcomes Study (PAROS) database. Data on the population old-age dependency ratio (i.e. elderly/non-elderly) were extracted from publicly accessible sources (United Nations and World Health Organization).
Results: We analyzed 40,872 OHCA cases from seven PAROS countries over the period 2009 to 2013. We found significant correlation between the population old-age dependency ratio and elderly/non-elderly ratio in OHCA patients (r = 0.92, P = 0.003). There was a significant correlation between the population old-age dependency ratio and risk differences of 30-day survival rates for non-elderly and elderly OHCA patients (r = 0.89, P = 0.007).
Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the proportion of elderly among OHCA patients will increase, and outcomes could increasingly differ between elderly and non-elderly as a society ages progressively. This has implications for planning and delivery of emergency services as a society ages.
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated distribution and interactive association of RTI and STI with survival outcomes of OHCA in four Asian metropolitan cities.
METHODS: An OHCA cohort from Pan-Asian Resuscitation Outcome Study (PAROS) conducted between January 2009 and December 2011 was analyzed. Adult EMS-treated cardiac arrests with presumed cardiac origin were included. A multivariable logistic regression model with an interaction term was used to evaluate the effect of STI according to different RTI categories on survival outcomes. Risk-adjusted predicted rates of survival outcomes were calculated and compared with observed rate.
RESULTS: A total of 16,974 OHCA cases were analyzed after serial exclusion. Median RTI was 6.0 min (interquartile range [IQR] 5.0-8.0 min) and median STI was 12.0 min (IQR 8.0-16.1). The prolonged STI in the longest RTI group was associated with a lower rate of survival to discharge or of survival 30 days after arrest (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-0.81), as well as a poorer neurologic outcome (aOR 0.63; 95% CI 0.41-0.97) without an increasing chance of prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (aOR 1.12; 95% CI 0.88-1.45).
CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged STI in OHCA with a delayed response time had a negative association with survival outcomes in four Asian metropolitan cities using the scoop-and-run EMS model. Establishing an optimal STI based on the response time could be considered.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of trauma patients transported from the scene to hospitals by emergency medical service (EMS) from January 1, 2016, to November 30, 2018, using data from the Pan-Asia Trauma Outcomes Study (PATOS) database. Prehospital time intervals were categorized into response time (RT), scene to hospital time (SH), and total prehospital time (TPT). The outcomes were 30-day mortality and functional status at hospital discharge. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate the association of prehospital time and outcomes to adjust for factors including age, sex, mechanism and type of injury, Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and prehospital interventions. Overall, 24,365 patients from 4 countries (645 patients from Japan, 16,476 patients from Korea, 5,358 patients from Malaysia, and 1,886 patients from Taiwan) were included in the analysis. Among included patients, the median age was 45 years (lower quartile [Q1]-upper quartile [Q3]: 25-62), and 15,498 (63.6%) patients were male. Median (Q1-Q3) RT, SH, and TPT were 20 (Q1-Q3: 12-39), 21 (Q1-Q3: 16-29), and 47 (Q1-Q3: 32-60) minutes, respectively. In all, 280 patients (1.1%) died within 30 days after injury. Prehospital time intervals were not associated with 30-day mortality. The adjusted odds ratios (aORs) per 10 minutes of RT, SH, and TPT were 0.99 (95% CI 0.92-1.06, p = 0.740), 1.08 (95% CI 1.00-1.17, p = 0.065), and 1.03 (95% CI 0.98-1.09, p = 0.236), respectively. However, long prehospital time was detrimental to functional survival. The aORs of RT, SH, and TPT per 10-minute delay were 1.06 (95% CI 1.04-1.08, p < 0.001), 1.05 (95% CI 1.01-1.08, p = 0.007), and 1.06 (95% CI 1.04-1.08, p < 0.001), respectively. The key limitation of our study is the missing data inherent to the retrospective design. Another major limitation is the aggregate nature of the data from different countries and unaccounted confounders such as in-hospital management.
CONCLUSIONS: Longer prehospital time was not associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality, but it may be associated with increased risk of poor functional outcomes in injured patients. This finding supports the concept of the "golden hour" for trauma patients during prehospital care in the countries studied.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of data collected in the Pan-Asian Resuscitation Outcomes Study (PAROS) registry. We included OHCA cases from seven communities (Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and United Arab Emirates) between January 2009 and December 2012. Paediatric cases, cases that were conveyed by non-emergency medical services (EMS), and cases with incomplete records were excluded from the study.
RESULTS: The RACA score showed similar discrimination performance as the original German study and various European validation studies. However, it had poor calibration with the original constant regression coefficient, which was primarily due to the low ROSC rate (8.2%) in the PAROS cohort. The calibration performance of RACA significantly improved after the constant coefficient was modified to adjust for the disparity in ROSC rates between Asia and Europe.
CONCLUSION: This is the largest validation study of the RACA score. RACA consistently performs well in both Pan-Asian and European communities and can thus be a valuable tool for evaluating EMS systems. However, to implement it, the constant coefficient has to be modified in the RACA formula with local historical data.
METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in the participating centers of the Pan-Asian Trauma Outcome Study from October 2015 to December 2020. Subjects who reported "school" as the site of injury were included. Major trauma was defined as an Injury Severity Score (ISS) value of ≥16.
RESULTS: In total, 1305 injury cases (1.0% of 127,715 events) occurred at schools. Among these, 68.2% were children. Unintentional injuries were the leading cause and intentional injuries comprised 7.5% of the cohort. Major trauma accounted for 7.1% of those with documented ISS values. Multivariable regression revealed associations between major trauma and factors, including age, intention of injury (self-harm), type of injury (traffic injuries, falls), and body part injured (head, thorax, and abdomen). Twenty-two (1.7%) died, with six deaths related to self-harm. Females represented 28.4% of injuries but accounted for 40.9% of all deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: In Asia, injuries at schools affect a significant number of children. Although the incidence of injuries was higher in males, self-inflicted injuries and mortality cases were relatively higher in females.
IMPACT: Epidemiological data and risk factors for major trauma resulting from school injuries in Asia are lacking. This study identified significant risk factors for major trauma occurring at schools, including age, intention of injury (self-harm), injury type (traffic injuries, falls), and body part injured (head, thoracic, and abdominal injuries). Although the incidence of injuries was higher in males, the incidence of self-harm injuries and mortality rates were higher in females. The results of this would make a significant contribution to the development of prevention strategies and relative policies concerning school injuries.
METHODS: We conducted a multinational retrospective cohort study involving adult trauma patients admitted to emergency departments in the included countries from 2016 to 2020. Prehospital and hospital data were reviewed from the Pan-Asia Trauma Outcomes Study database. Patients aged ≥18 years transported by emergency medical services were included. Patients lacking data regarding age, sex, physiological criteria, or injury severity scores were excluded. We examined the performance of sFTS in all age groups and fine-tuned physiological criteria to improve sFTS performance in identifying high-risk trauma patients in different age groups.
RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of the physiological and anatomical criteria for identifying major trauma (injury severity score ≥ 16) were 80.6% and 58.8%, respectively. The modified sFTS showed increased sensitivity and decreased specificity, with more pronounced changes in the young age group. Adding the shock index further increased sensitivity in both age groups.
CONCLUSIONS: sFTS using only physiological and anatomical criteria is suboptimal for Asian adult patients with trauma of all age groups. Adjusting the physiological criteria and adding a shock index as a triage tool can improve the sensitivity of severely injured patients, particularly in young age groups. A swift field triage process can maintain acceptable sensitivity and specificity in severely injured patients.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the ability of the prehospital GCS and GCS-M to predict 30-day mortality and severe disability in trauma patients.
DESIGN: We used the Pan-Asia Trauma Outcomes Study registry to enroll all trauma patients >18 years of age who presented to hospitals via emergency medical services from 1 January 2016 to November 30, 2018.
SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 16,218 patients were included in the analysis of 30-day mortality and 11 653 patients in the analysis of functional outcomes.
OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was 30-day mortality after injury, and the secondary outcome was severe disability at discharge defined as a Modified Rankin Scale (MRS) score ≥4. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCs) were compared between GCS and GCS-M for these outcomes. Patients with and without traumatic brain injury (TBI) were analyzed separately. The predictive discrimination ability of logistic regression models for outcomes (30-day mortality and MRS) between GCS and GCS-M is illustrated using AUROCs.
MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome for 30-day mortality was 1.04% and the AUROCs and 95% confidence intervals for prediction were GCS: 0.917 (0.887-0.946) vs. GCS-M:0.907 (0.875-0.938), P = 0.155. The secondary outcome for poor functional outcome (MRS ≥ 4) was 12.4% and the AUROCs and 95% confidence intervals for prediction were GCS: 0.617 (0.597-0.637) vs. GCS-M: 0.613 (0.593-0.633), P = 0.616. The subgroup analyses of patients with and without TBI demonstrated consistent discrimination ability between the GCS and GCS-M. The AUROC values of the GCS vs. GCS-M models for 30-day mortality and poor functional outcome were 0.92 (0.821-1.0) vs. 0.92 (0.824-1.0) ( P = 0.64) and 0.75 (0.72-0.78) vs. 0.74 (0.717-0.758) ( P = 0.21), respectively.
CONCLUSION: In the prehospital setting, on-scene GCS-M was comparable to GCS in predicting 30-day mortality and poor functional outcomes among patients with trauma, whether or not there was a TBI.