J.C. Van Ditshuizen , M.A.C. De Jongh , D. Den Hartog , K.W.W. Lansink , M.H.J. Verhofstad , E.M.M. Van Lieshout
{"title":"Psychological health status after major trauma across different levels of trauma care: A multicentre secondary analysis","authors":"J.C. Van Ditshuizen , M.A.C. De Jongh , D. Den Hartog , K.W.W. Lansink , M.H.J. Verhofstad , E.M.M. Van Lieshout","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2025.112152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Concentration of trauma care in trauma network has resulted in different trauma populations across designated levels of trauma care.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Describing psychological health status, by means of the impact event scale (IES) and the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS), of major trauma patients one and two years post-trauma across different levels of trauma care in trauma networks.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A multicentre retrospective cohort study was conducted. Inclusion criteria: aged ≥ 18 and an Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15, surviving their injuries one year after trauma. Psychological health status was self-reported with HADS and IES. Subgroup analysis, univariate, and multivariable analysis were done on level of trauma care and trauma region for HADS and IES as outcome measures.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Psychological health issues were frequently reported (likely depressed n = 31, 14.7 %); likely anxious n = 32, 15.2 %; indication of a post-traumatic stress disorder n = 46, 18.0 %). Respondents admitted to a level I trauma centre reported more symptoms of anxiety (3, P<sub>25</sub>-P<sub>75</sub> 1–6 vs. 5, P<sub>25</sub>-P<sub>75</sub> 2–9, p = 0.002), depression (2, P<sub>25</sub>-P<sub>75</sub> 1–5 vs. 5, P<sub>25</sub>-P<sub>75</sub> 2–9, p < 0.001), and post-traumatic stress (6, P<sub>25</sub>-P<sub>75</sub> 0–15 vs. 13, P<sub>25</sub>-P<sub>75</sub> 3–33, p = 0.001), than patients admitted to a non-level I trauma centre. Differences across trauma regions were reported for depression (3, P<sub>25</sub>-P<sub>75</sub> 1–6 vs. 4, P<sub>25</sub>-P<sub>75</sub> 2–10, p = 0.030) and post-traumatic stress (7, P<sub>25</sub>-P<sub>75</sub> 0–18 vs. 15, P<sub>25</sub>-P<sub>75</sub> 4–34, p < 0.001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Major trauma patients admitted to a level I trauma centre have more depressive, anxious, and post-traumatic stress symptoms than when admitted to a non-level I trauma centre. These symptoms differed across trauma regions, indicating populations differences. Level of trauma care and trauma region are important when analysing psychological health status.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54978,"journal":{"name":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","volume":"56 2","pages":"Article 112152"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020138325000129","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
Concentration of trauma care in trauma network has resulted in different trauma populations across designated levels of trauma care.
Objective
Describing psychological health status, by means of the impact event scale (IES) and the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS), of major trauma patients one and two years post-trauma across different levels of trauma care in trauma networks.
Methods
A multicentre retrospective cohort study was conducted. Inclusion criteria: aged ≥ 18 and an Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15, surviving their injuries one year after trauma. Psychological health status was self-reported with HADS and IES. Subgroup analysis, univariate, and multivariable analysis were done on level of trauma care and trauma region for HADS and IES as outcome measures.
Results
Psychological health issues were frequently reported (likely depressed n = 31, 14.7 %); likely anxious n = 32, 15.2 %; indication of a post-traumatic stress disorder n = 46, 18.0 %). Respondents admitted to a level I trauma centre reported more symptoms of anxiety (3, P25-P75 1–6 vs. 5, P25-P75 2–9, p = 0.002), depression (2, P25-P75 1–5 vs. 5, P25-P75 2–9, p < 0.001), and post-traumatic stress (6, P25-P75 0–15 vs. 13, P25-P75 3–33, p = 0.001), than patients admitted to a non-level I trauma centre. Differences across trauma regions were reported for depression (3, P25-P75 1–6 vs. 4, P25-P75 2–10, p = 0.030) and post-traumatic stress (7, P25-P75 0–18 vs. 15, P25-P75 4–34, p < 0.001).
Conclusions
Major trauma patients admitted to a level I trauma centre have more depressive, anxious, and post-traumatic stress symptoms than when admitted to a non-level I trauma centre. These symptoms differed across trauma regions, indicating populations differences. Level of trauma care and trauma region are important when analysing psychological health status.
期刊介绍:
Injury was founded in 1969 and is an international journal dealing with all aspects of trauma care and accident surgery. Our primary aim is to facilitate the exchange of ideas, techniques and information among all members of the trauma team.