1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Trends in Firearm Injury and Motor Vehicle Crash Case Fatality by Age Group, 2003-2013

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-soi180080-1"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d692046e325">Question</h5> <p id="d692046e327">Does juxtaposition of lethality trends for motor vehicle crashes and firearm injuries expose mechanism-specific injury severity trends? </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-soi180080-2"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d692046e330">Findings</h5> <p id="d692046e332">In this repeated cross-sectional measures analysis of data on patients treated at level I or II trauma centers from 2003 to 2013, firearm assault and self-inflicted firearm injury were highly lethal in terms of case-fatality percentage and the percentage of out-of-hospital deaths. Annual trends significantly declined for motor vehicle crashes in all age groups but not for firearms in any intent or age group. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-soi180080-3"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d692046e335">Meaning</h5> <p id="d692046e337">Seen alongside trends in case-fatality percentage for motor vehicle crashes, it appears that injuries resulting from firearms may be worsening in severity. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-soi180080-4"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d692046e341">Importance</h5> <p id="d692046e343">If changes over time in trauma care apply to both firearm injuries and motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) similarly, differences in mechanism-specific case-fatality trends may suggest changes over time in injury severity. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-soi180080-5"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d692046e346">Objectives</h5> <p id="d692046e348">To analyze national trends in case-fatality percentages at levels I and II trauma centers for injuries due to MVC, firearm assault, self-inflicted firearm injury, and unintentional firearm injury by age and to analyze trends in injury severity scores (ISSs) and the percentage of out-of-hospital deaths by mechanism. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-soi180080-6"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d692046e351">Design, Setting, and Participants</h5> <p id="d692046e353">From November 15, 2017, to July 4, 2018, repeated cross-sectional measures analysis of 1 335 044 patients treated at level I or II trauma centers from January 1, 2003, through December 31, 2013, was conducted using 2 data sources: the National Trauma Data Bank National Sample Program, with survey weights to estimate annual median ISS, total injuries and total deaths at levels I and II trauma centers, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research for percentages of out-of-hospital deaths. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-soi180080-7"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d692046e356">Main Outcome Measures</h5> <p id="d692046e358">The main outcome was annual case-fatality percentage (total died/total injured), calculated by mechanism across 3 age groups (15-34 years, 35-54 years, and ≥55 years) and 5 categories of ISS (1-15 [mild] 16-24, 25-40, 41-66, and 67-75 [severe]). Linear regression was performed to estimate annual trends in case-fatality percentage by mechanism, age group, and ISS. Annual trends in percentages of out-of-hospital deaths and median ISSs by mechanism were estimated. Sensitivity analyses included the Durbin-Watson statistic for autocorrelation and Prais-Winsten regression models. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-soi180080-8"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d692046e361">Results</h5> <p id="d692046e363">Among 1 335 044 patients treated at level I or II trauma centers, self-inflicted firearm injury had a case-fatality percentage of 42.8%, and assault with a firearm had a case-fatality percentage of 11.1%, the 2 highest of the injuries studied. The injury case-fatality percentage was lower each year for MVCs but did not change for any firearm intent overall or for any age group. Overall, median ISS increased annually for firearm suicide (0.31; 95% CI, 0.00-0.61). The annual percentage of out-of-hospital deaths was lower each year for MVCs (−0.24; 95% CI, −0.43 to −0.05) but not for any firearm intents. In sensitivity analyses, the annual percentage of out-of-hospital deaths for MVCs no longer showed a decline. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-soi180080-9"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d692046e366">Conclusions and Relevance</h5> <p id="d692046e368">Stagnant case-fatality percentages for firearm injuries juxtaposed to improvements for MVCs across age-groups and ISS categories suggests worsening severity of firearm injuries over the study period. </p> </div><p class="first" id="d692046e371">This repeated cross-sectional measures analysis of data from the National Trauma Data Bank National Sample Program compares trends in case-fatality percentages of motor vehicle crashes and firearm injuries in US levels I and II trauma centers across 10 years to assess whether firearm injuries are increasing in severity. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A national evaluation of the effect of trauma-center care on mortality.

          Hospitals have difficulty justifying the expense of maintaining trauma centers without strong evidence of their effectiveness. To address this gap, we examined differences in mortality between level 1 trauma centers and hospitals without a trauma center (non-trauma centers). Mortality outcomes were compared among patients treated in 18 hospitals with a level 1 trauma center and 51 hospitals non-trauma centers located in 14 states. Patients 18 to 84 years old with a moderate-to-severe injury were eligible. Complete data were obtained for 1104 patients who died in the hospital and 4087 patients who were discharged alive. We used propensity-score weighting to adjust for observable differences between patients treated at trauma centers and those treated at non-trauma centers. After adjustment for differences in the case mix, the in-hospital mortality rate was significantly lower at trauma centers than at non-trauma centers (7.6 percent vs. 9.5 percent; relative risk, 0.80; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.66 to 0.98), as was the one-year mortality rate (10.4 percent vs. 13.8 percent; relative risk, 0.75; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.60 to 0.95). The effects of treatment at a trauma center varied according to the severity of injury, with evidence to suggest that differences in mortality rates were primarily confined to patients with more severe injuries. Our findings show that the risk of death is significantly lower when care is provided in a trauma center than in a non-trauma center and argue for continued efforts at regionalization. Copyright 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            How to do (or not to do) ... Assessing the impact of a policy change with routine longitudinal data.

            A lack of good quality evidence on the effect of alternative social policies in low- and middle-income countries has been recently underlined and the value of randomized trials increasingly advocated. However, it is also acknowledged that randomization is not always feasible or politically acceptable. Analyses using longitudinal data series before and after an intervention can also deliver robust results and such data are often reasonably easy to access. Using the example of evaluating the impact on utilization of a change in health financing policy, this article explains how studies in the literature have often failed to address the possible biases that can arise in a simple analysis of routine longitudinal data. It then describes two possible statistical approaches to estimate impact in a more reliable manner and illustrates in detail the more simple method. Advantages and limitations of this quasi-experimental approach to evaluating the impact of health policies are discussed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Hidden Epidemic of Firearm Injury: Increasing Firearm Injury Rates During 2001–2013

              Investigating firearm injury trends over the past decade, we examined temporal trends overall and according to race/ethnicity and intent in fatal and nonfatal firearm injuries (FFIs and NFIs) in United States during 2001-2013. Counts of FFIs and estimated counts of NFIs were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System. Poisson regression was used to analyze overall and subgroup temporal trends and to estimate annual change per 100,000 persons (change). Total firearm injuries (n = 1,328,109) increased annually by 0.36 (Ptrend < 0.0001). FFIs remained constant (change = 0.02; Ptrend = 0.22) while NFIs increased (change = 0.35; Ptrend < 0.0001). Homicide FFIs declined (change = -0.05; Ptrend < 0.0001) while homicide NFIs increased (change = 0.43; Ptrend < 0.0001). Suicide FFIs increased (change = 0.07; Ptrend < 0.0001) while unintentional FFIs and NFIs declined (changes = -0.01 and -0.09, respectively; Ptrend < 0.0001 and 0.005). Among whites, FFIs (change = 0.15; Ptrend < 0.0001) and NFIs (change = 0.13; Ptrend < 0.0001) increased; among blacks, FFIs declined (change = -0.20; Ptrend < 0.0001). Among Hispanics, FFIs declined (change = -0.28; Ptrend < 0.0001) while NFIs increased (change = 0.55; Ptrend = 0.014). The endemic firearm-related injury rates during the first decade of the 21st century mask a shift from firearm deaths towards a rapid rise in nonfatal injuries.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Surgery
                JAMA Surg
                American Medical Association (AMA)
                2168-6254
                December 19 2018
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, Seattle, Washington
                [2 ]Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
                [3 ]Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle
                [4 ]Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle
                [5 ]Editor, JAMA Network Open
                Article
                10.1001/jamasurg.2018.4685
                6484793
                30566198
                3862ada7-b749-4213-9774-7a2ba0a700f0
                © 2018
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article