Aetiology of Traumatic Shock in an Australian Level 1 Trauma Centre.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Michael Noonan, Fraser Francis-Pester, Gerard O'Reilly, Joseph Mathew, Chris Groombridge, Dinesh Varma, Mark Fitzgerald
{"title":"Aetiology of Traumatic Shock in an Australian Level 1 Trauma Centre.","authors":"Michael Noonan, Fraser Francis-Pester, Gerard O'Reilly, Joseph Mathew, Chris Groombridge, Dinesh Varma, Mark Fitzgerald","doi":"10.1111/1742-6723.70286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Resuscitation of traumatic shock (TS) is reflexively oriented towards haemorrhage control, reflecting its contribution to early preventable mortality. While the mechanisms of shock are well established, the relative frequency of haemorrhagic, non-haemorrhagic, indeterminate, and mixed aetiologies in blunt-predominant cohorts is less well characterised. This study aimed to identify and rank the causes of TS among adult major trauma (MT) patients managed at an Australian Level 1 trauma centre.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study (Dec 2022-Jan 2025) identified MT patients meeting a pragmatic clinical definition of TS based on early physiological parameters. Structured chart review assigned one or more causes of shock using a predefined hierarchy spanning haemorrhagic, non-haemorrhagic, and indeterminate categories. Causes were ranked by frequency and stratified by injury mechanism.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 3667 MT patients, 324 (8.8%) met TS criteria. Shocked patients were younger, more severely injured, and had higher in-hospital mortality (22.5% vs. 9.1%). Blunt trauma predominated (86.7%). Pooled haemorrhagic mechanisms accounted for 66.3% of primary aetiologies (64.8% blunt; 76.2% penetrating), leaving approximately one-third of cases attributable to non-haemorrhagic or indeterminate causes. The primary cause was indeterminate in 14.8%, more frequent after blunt than penetrating injury (16.0% vs. 7.1%). Multiple contributory causes were identified in 44.0% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While haemorrhage remained the dominant aetiology of traumatic shock, approximately one-third of cases were attributable to non-haemorrhagic, indeterminate, or mixed mechanisms, with these proportions higher following blunt injury. These findings argue against an exclusively haemorrhage-centred diagnostic approach in blunt-predominant trauma systems and support routine consideration of alternative and coexisting aetiologies during early resuscitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":11604,"journal":{"name":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","volume":"38 3","pages":"e70286"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.70286","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Resuscitation of traumatic shock (TS) is reflexively oriented towards haemorrhage control, reflecting its contribution to early preventable mortality. While the mechanisms of shock are well established, the relative frequency of haemorrhagic, non-haemorrhagic, indeterminate, and mixed aetiologies in blunt-predominant cohorts is less well characterised. This study aimed to identify and rank the causes of TS among adult major trauma (MT) patients managed at an Australian Level 1 trauma centre.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study (Dec 2022-Jan 2025) identified MT patients meeting a pragmatic clinical definition of TS based on early physiological parameters. Structured chart review assigned one or more causes of shock using a predefined hierarchy spanning haemorrhagic, non-haemorrhagic, and indeterminate categories. Causes were ranked by frequency and stratified by injury mechanism.

Results: Of 3667 MT patients, 324 (8.8%) met TS criteria. Shocked patients were younger, more severely injured, and had higher in-hospital mortality (22.5% vs. 9.1%). Blunt trauma predominated (86.7%). Pooled haemorrhagic mechanisms accounted for 66.3% of primary aetiologies (64.8% blunt; 76.2% penetrating), leaving approximately one-third of cases attributable to non-haemorrhagic or indeterminate causes. The primary cause was indeterminate in 14.8%, more frequent after blunt than penetrating injury (16.0% vs. 7.1%). Multiple contributory causes were identified in 44.0% of cases.

Conclusion: While haemorrhage remained the dominant aetiology of traumatic shock, approximately one-third of cases were attributable to non-haemorrhagic, indeterminate, or mixed mechanisms, with these proportions higher following blunt injury. These findings argue against an exclusively haemorrhage-centred diagnostic approach in blunt-predominant trauma systems and support routine consideration of alternative and coexisting aetiologies during early resuscitation.

澳大利亚一级创伤中心的创伤性休克病因学。
目的:创伤性休克复苏(TS)以出血控制为条件反射性导向,反映了其对早期可预防死亡的贡献。虽然休克的机制已经确定,但在钝器为主的队列中,出血性、非出血性、不确定和混合病因的相对频率还不太清楚。本研究旨在确定澳大利亚一级创伤中心管理的成人重大创伤(MT)患者中TS的原因并对其进行排序。方法:一项回顾性队列研究(2022年12月至2025年1月)确定MT患者符合基于早期生理参数的实用临床定义。结构化的图表审查分配一个或多个休克的原因使用预定义的层次跨越出血,非出血,和不确定的类别。病因按发生频率排序,按损伤机制分层。结果:3667例MT患者中,324例(8.8%)符合TS标准。休克患者更年轻,受伤更严重,住院死亡率更高(22.5%对9.1%)。钝性创伤占主导地位(86.7%)。合并出血机制占主要病因的66.3%(64.8%为钝性,76.2%为穿透性),剩下约三分之一的病例可归因于非出血或不确定原因。14.8%的主要原因不明,在钝伤后比穿透伤后更常见(16.0%比7.1%)。在44.0%的病例中确定了多种原因。结论:虽然出血仍然是外伤性休克的主要病因,但大约三分之一的病例可归因于非出血、不确定或混合机制,而钝器损伤后这一比例更高。这些发现反对单纯以出血为中心的钝性创伤诊断方法,并支持在早期复苏时常规考虑其他和共存的病因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Emergency Medicine Australasia
Emergency Medicine Australasia 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
13.00%
发文量
217
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Emergency Medicine Australasia is the official journal of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) and the Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine (ASEM), and publishes original articles dealing with all aspects of clinical practice, research, education and experiences in emergency medicine. Original articles are published under the following sections: Original Research, Paediatric Emergency Medicine, Disaster Medicine, Education and Training, Ethics, International Emergency Medicine, Management and Quality, Medicolegal Matters, Prehospital Care, Public Health, Rural and Remote Care, Technology, Toxicology and Trauma. Accepted papers become the copyright of the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书