Introduction: It was demonstrated that the early trauma team activation (TTA) could improve younger trauma patients outcomes and mortality rates. However, the link between older patient prognosis improvement and the activation / effectiveness of the Trauma team (TT) is still unclear. There is also a lack of information about the exact and optimal structure of TTs and their activation criteria, which may differ across centers. The main objective of this study is to provide a description of the current TT available in level 1 and 2 centres across Canada. Methods: In 2017, a survey using a modified Dillman technique was sent to 210 health professionals scattered across all Canadian trauma care facilities. The survey included questions regarding 1) the presence and the composition of a TT, 2) the established TT activation criteria, and finally 3) the initial patient care. Results: A total of 107 (57%) completed surveys were received. Among them, only 22 (11.7%) were from level 1 or 2 centres and were therefore considered for analyses. Seventeen respondents had a TT in their centre, and they all shared their TT activation criteria (1 to 27 different indications). Most frequently mentioned criteria were: suspected injuries (58.8%), judgment of the emergency physician (41.2%), systolic blood pressure (47.1%), Glasgow Coma score (35.3%) and respiratory rate (28%). In presence of a prehospital care warning trauma, the initial assessment of a severely injured patient is exclusively completed by a member of the TT for only 35.1% of the respondents. For 11.8% of respondents, TT coordinates airway management. For 64.7% of participants, the TT leader is the dedicated care provider to accompany patients until final orientation. Conclusion: These results suggest a great variability across Canada regarding the roles assumed by the TT, but also regarding the activation criteria leading them to take action.

Introduction: Trauma teams have been shown to improve outcomes in severely injured patients. The criteria used to mobilize trauma teams is highly variable and debated. This study was undertaken to define the triage accuracy at our level 1 trauma centre and identify the criteria predictive of appropriate activations. Methods: A 3-month prospective observational study was performed and all patients presenting to the ER who received a trauma flag were identified. Patient demographics, vital signs, trauma team activation and criteria for activation were documented. Trauma activations were deemed appropriate if the patient met any of the following; airway intervention, needle/tube thoracostomy, resuscitative thoracotomy, ED blood product transfusion, invasive hemodynamic monitoring, central line insertion, emergent OR (<8 hours), admission to ICU, and death within 72 hours. Over and undertriage rates were calculated and a multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify activation criteria predictive of appropraite activations. The activation criteria were then modified and the prospective study was repeated to assess the impact on triage accuracy. Results: Between September to December 2015, 188 patients received a trauma flag. 137 patients met the activation criteria, however only 78 received a trauma team activation. 57% of patients who had TTA met the definition of appropriate activation, while 45% who met criteria for activation met the definition of appropriate. The rates of under and overtriage were 30.4% and 30.3%, respectively. Logistic regression revealed the following criteria to be predictive of appropriate activation; hypotension (OR 10.2 95% CI 2.3,45.5), arrival by HEMS (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.4,7.6), pedestrian struck (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.4,8.5) and fall (OR 5.1, 95% CI 1.7, 15.1). Tachycardia (OR 1.1, 95% 0.3,4.6) and high energy MVC (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.7,3.1) were not found to be predictive. The post-modification study occured between September to December 2016. Data analysis to assess the impact of criteria alteration are currently underway and will be presented at CAEP 2017. Conclusion: Triage accuracy for the mobilization of a multi-disciplinary trauma team is important, both to ensure optimal patient care as well as to reduce unnecessary resource strain. Our previous criteria lead to high rates of undertriage and subsequent modifications have been made. The impact of these changes will be ascertained and presented at CAEP 2017.