Is level 1 trauma care necessary for all severely injured older patients? Evaluating undertriage and feasibility of care in major and non-major trauma centres in the Netherlands.
European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery · 2025-06-16 · Registry study
Abstract
PURPOSE: Undertriage remains a challenge within the severely injured older patients. The survival benefit in major trauma centres (MTCs) compared to non-major trauma centres (nMTCs) has been disputed. This study aimed to assess the differences in patient characteristics of severely injured older patients treated in MTCs and nMTCs and to regard whether these characteristics could be related to pre-hospital triage decisions and influence clinical outcomes in MTCs and nMTCs. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, using the Dutch National Trauma Registry to identify all patients of 70 and above with an ISS ≥ 16 during 2016-2022. Patient characteristics and outcomes between MTCs, nMTCs and directly transferred patients were compared. Backward logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors predicting mortality. RESULTS: A total of 10,899 patients were included. Patients in nMTCs harboured more octo- and nonagenarians than MTCs (44.6% vs. 37.2% and 15.1% vs. 6.7% resp., p < 0.001). The ISS was significantly lower in nMTCs (median 19 [IQR 17-25] vs. 22 [17-27], p < 0.001), with severe head injury and a low GCS being more prevalent in MTCs. High energy falls were more often observed in MTCs (15.6% vs. 7.7%, p < 0.001). Mortality was significantly lower in nMTCs (OR 0.59, 95%-CI 0.54-0.65), with a GCS 3-8 strongly associated with an increased risk for mortality in both nMTCs and MTCs (OR 19.93, p < 0.001 and OR 7.87, p < 0.001 resp.). CONCLUSION: The differences in patients presented in MTCs and nMTCs indicate factors contributing to undertriage; severely injured older patients with recognizable injuries and trauma mechanisms are more likely to be presented in a MTC. Whether feasible care for severely injured older patients should be provided in MTCs or nMTCs should not only be dependent on ISS and mortality rates; patient-centred care goals harbouring broader perspectives as frailty and health- and quality-of-life benefit of aggressive injury treatment should also contribute in triage- and treatment decision-making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE AND STUDY TYPE: Level III, prognostic/epidemiological.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Mortality & survival · Older adults · Quality of life & function
Related articles
- Effect of age on the interaction between heart rate and mortality in prehospital trauma care (Signa Vitae, 2021)
- The Association of Trauma Center Transport and Long-term Functional Outcomes in Head-injured Older Adults Transported by Emergency Medical Services. (Acad Emerg Med, 2020)
- Physician-staffed prehospital units for severely injured patients in the Stockholm trauma system - is there a survival benefit? (Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2026)
- Risk factors and mortality associated with undertriage after major trauma in a physician-led prehospital system: a retrospective multicentre cohort study. (Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2023)
- A comparison of major trauma patient transport destination in metropolitan Perth, Western Australia. (Australas Emerg Care, 2020)
- It is time for a change in the management of elderly severely injured patients! An analysis of 126,015 patients from the TraumaRegister DGU®. (Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2020)