Geriatric trauma: resource use and patient outcomes.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Elderly patients who suffer trauma have a higher mortality and use disproportionately more trauma resources than younger patients. To compare these 2 groups and determine the outcomes and characteristics of elderly patients, we reviewed patients in these 2 groups admitted and treated in our tertiary care provincial trauma centre. METHODS: From the provincial trauma registry we selected a cohort of 40 geriatric patients (group 1) (> or = 65 yr of age) with an ISS of 16 or more who were admitted to and spent time in our trauma service for more than 48 hours and compared them with a similar randomly selected cohort of 44 patients (group 2) aged 20-30 years. Family physicians were contacted for follow-up of these patients 2 years after discharge. We considered length of hospital stay, complications, disposition of the patients and use of consultation services. RESULTS: Patients in group 1 had a mean age of 72.1 years (range from 65-98 yr) and a mean ISS of 27.3 (range from 17-50). Patients in group 2 had a mean age of 26.3 years (range from 22-29 yr) and a mean ISS of 26.3 (range from 17-54). Hospital stay was significantly longer in the group 1: 34.5 days (95% confidence interval [CI]: 24-44 d) versus 21.6 days (95% CI: 15-28 d). More elderly patients experienced complications (35 v. 13, p < 0.001) and required medical consultations (35 v. 26, p < 0.001). In-hospital death rates were 8% (3 of 40) and 4% (2 of 44) respectively (p = 0.3). Fewer geriatric patients could be discharged home (35% [14 of 40] v. 27% [22 of 44], p = 0.056) or to rehabilitation facilities (28% [11 of 40] v. 34% [15 of 44], p = 0.3). Five geriatric patients were discharged to nursing homes (p = 0.007). Of the geriatric patients discharged to rehabilitation facilities or home, 75% were independent 2 years after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive care for geriatric trauma patients is warranted, and resources should be directed toward rehabilitation. Based on our findings, we expect that creating a directed care pathway for these patients, targetting complications and earlier discharge, will further improve their outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".