Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

ACC 2024 Congress

Catch up on all the top stories and latest evidence in cardiology research with our ACC 2024 Congress hub page.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery
Published in: European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery 3/2022

Open Access 12-09-2021 | Original Article

Health-related quality of life and return to work 1 year after major trauma from a network perspective

Authors: Jan C. van Ditshuizen, Esther M. M. van Lieshout, Ed F. van Beeck, Michiel H. J. Verhofstad, Dennis den Hartog, Dutch Trauma Registry Southwest

Published in: European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery | Issue 3/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Major trauma often results in long-term disabilities. The aim of this study was to assess health-related quality of life, cognition, and return to work 1 year after major trauma from a trauma network perspective.

Methods

All major trauma patients in 2016 (Injury Severity Score > 15, n = 536) were selected from trauma region Southwest Netherlands. Eligible patients (n = 365) were sent questionnaires with the EQ-5D-5L and questions on cognition, level of education, comorbidities, and resumption of paid work 1 year after trauma.

Results

A 50% (n = 182) response rate was obtained. EQ-US and EQ-VAS scored a median (IQR) of 0.81 (0.62–0.89) and 70 (60–80), respectively. Limitations were prevalent in all health dimensions of the EQ-5D-5L; 90 (50%) responders reported problems with mobility, 36 (20%) responders reported problems with self-care, 108 (61%) responders reported problems during daily activities, 129 (73%) responders reported pain or discomfort, 70 (39%) responders reported problems with anxiety or depression, and 102 (61%) of the patients reported problems with cognition. Return to work rate was 68% (37% full, 31% partial). A median (IQR) EQ-US of 0.89 (0.82–1.00) and EQ-VAS of 80 (70–90) were scored for fully working responders; 0.77 (0.66–0.85, p < 0.001) and 70 (62–80, p = 0.001) for partial working respondents; and 0.49 (0.23–0.69, p < 0.001) and 55 (40–72, p < 0.001) for unemployed respondents.

Conclusion

The majority experience problems in all health domains of the EQ-5D-5L and cognition. Return to work status was associated with all health domains of the EQ-5D-5L and cognition.
Literature
1.
Haagsma JA, Graetz N, Bolliger I, Naghavi M, Higashi H, Mullany EC, et al. The global burden of injury: incidence, mortality, disability-adjusted life years and time trends from the Global Burden of Disease study 2013. Inj Prev. 2016;22:3–18.CrossRef
2.
Lyons RA, Finch CF, McClure R, van Beeck E, Macey S. The injury List of All Deficits (LOAD) Framework–conceptualizing the full range of deficits and adverse outcomes following injury and violence. Int J Inj Contr Saf Promot. 2010;17:145–59.CrossRef
3.
Polinder S, Haagsma JA, Panneman M, Scholten A, Brugmans M, van Beeck EF. The economic burden of injury: Health care and productivity costs of injuries in the Netherlands. Accid Anal Prev. 2016;93:92–100.CrossRef
4.
MacKenzie EJ, Rivara FP, Jurkovich GJ, Nathens AB, Frey KP, Egleston BL, et al. A national evaluation of the effect of trauma-center care on mortality. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:366–78.CrossRef
5.
Celso B, Tepas J, Langland-Orban B, Pracht E, Papa L, Lottenberg L, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing outcome of severely injured patients treated in trauma centers following the establishment of trauma systems. J Trauma. 2006;60:371–8.CrossRef
6.
van Delft-Schreurs CCHM, van Bergen JJ, de Jongh MAC, van de Sande P, Verhofstad MHJ, de Vries J. Quality of life in severely injured patients depends on psychosocial factors rather than on severity or type of injury. Injury. 2014;45:320–6.CrossRef
7.
de Jongh MAC, Kruithof N, Gosens T, van de Ree CL, de Munter L, Brouwers L, et al. Prevalence, recovery patterns and predictors of quality of life and costs after non-fatal injury: the Brabant Injury Outcome Surveillance (BIOS) study. Inj Prev. 2017;23:59.CrossRef
8.
Sturms LM, Driessen MLS, van Klaveren D, Ten Duis HJ, Kommer GJ, Bloemers FW, et al. Dutch trauma system performance: Are injured patients treated at the right place? Injury. 2021;52:1688.CrossRef
9.
Gabbe BJ, Simpson PM, Cameron PA, Ponsford J, Lyons RA, Collie A, et al. Long-term health status and trajectories of seriously injured patients: a population-based longitudinal study. PLoS Med. 2017;14:e1002322.CrossRef
10.
Angerpointner K, Ernstberger A, Bosch K, Zeman F, Koller M, Kerschbaum M. Quality of life after multiple trauma: results from a patient cohort treated in a certified trauma network. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2019;47:121.CrossRef
11.
Baker SP, O’Neill B, Haddon W, Long WB. The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care. J Trauma. 1974;14:187–96.CrossRef
12.
Committee on Medical Aspects of Automotive Safety. Rating the severity of tissue damage. I. The abbreviated scale. JAMA. 1971;215(2):277–80.CrossRef
13.
Llaquet Bayo H, Montmany S, Rebasa P, Secanella M, Alberich M, Navarro S. Analysis of quality of life after major trauma: a spanish follow-up cohort study. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2019;45:289–97.CrossRef
14.
Born K, Amsler F, Gross T. Prospective evaluation of the Quality of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI) score: minor differences in patients with major versus no or mild traumatic brain injury at one-year follow up. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16:136.CrossRef
15.
Driessen MLS, Sturms LM, Bloemers FW, Ten Duis HJ, Edwards MJR, den Hartog D, et al. The Dutch nationwide trauma registry: the value of capturing all acute trauma admissions. Injury. 2020;51:2553.CrossRef
16.
Gennarelli TA, Wodzin E. AIS 2005: a contemporary injury scale. Injury. 2006;37:1083–91.CrossRef
17.
Salvi F, Miller MD, Grilli A, Giorgi R, Towers AL, Morichi V, et al. A manual of guidelines to score the modified cumulative illness rating scale and its validation in acute hospitalized elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008;56(10):1926–31.CrossRef
18.
Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20:1727–36.CrossRef
19.
Janssen MF, Pickard AS, Golicki D, Gudex C, Niewada M, Scalone L, et al. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res. 2013;22:1717–27.CrossRef
20.
Van Beeck EF, Larsen CF, Lyons RA, Meerding WJ, Mulder S, Essink-Bot ML. Guidelines for the conduction of follow-up studies measuring injury-related disability. J Trauma. 2007;62:534–50.PubMed
21.
Geraerds A, Bonsel GJ, Janssen MF, de Jongh MA, Spronk I, Polinder S, et al. The added value of the EQ-5D with a cognition dimension in injury patients with and without traumatic brain injury. Qual Life Res. 2019;28(7):1931–9.CrossRef
22.
Hoeymans N, van Lindert H, Westert GP. The health status of the Dutch population as assessed by the EQ-6D. Qual Life Res. 2005;14:655–63.CrossRef
23.
Krabbe PF, Stouthard ME, Essink-Bot ML, Bonsel GJ. The effect of adding a cognitive dimension to the EuroQol multiattribute health-status classification system. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52(4):293–301.CrossRef
24.
Cameron CM, Purdie DM, Kliewer EV, McClure RJ. Differences in prevalence of pre-existing morbidity between injured and non-injured populations. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83(5):345–52.PubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Polinder S, van Beeck EF, Essink-Bot ML, Toet H, Looman CW, Mulder S, et al. Functional outcome at 2.5, 5, 9, and 24 months after injury in the Netherlands. J Trauma. 2007;62:133–41.CrossRef
26.
de Munter L, Polinder S, van de Ree CLP, Kruithof N, Lansink KWW, Steyerberg EW, et al. Predicting health status in the first year after trauma. Br J Surg. 2019;106:701–10.CrossRef
27.
Holtslag HR, van Beeck EF, Lichtveld RA, Leenen LP, Lindeman E, van der Werken C. Individual and population burdens of major trauma in the Netherlands. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86:111–7.CrossRef
28.
Holtslag HR, van Beeck EF, Lindeman E, Leenen LP. Determinants of long-term functional consequences after major trauma. J Trauma. 2007;62:919–27.PubMed
29.
Ringburg AN, Polinder S, van Ierland MC, Steyerberg EW, van Lieshout EM, Patka P, et al. Prevalence and prognostic factors of disability after major trauma. J Trauma. 2011;70:916–22.PubMed
30.
Kruithof N, Polinder S, de Munter L, van de Ree CLP, Lansink KW, de Jongh MAC, et al. Health status and psychological outcome after trauma; a prospective multicenter cohort study. Prevalence, recovery patterns and determinants of non-fatal outcome after trauma. PLoS ONE. 2020;3:38–59.
31.
Palmer CS, Gabbe BJ, Cameron PA. Defining major trauma using the 2008 abbreviated injury scale. Injury. 2016;47:109–15.CrossRef
32.
MacKenzie EJ, Morris JA Jr, Jurkovich GJ, Yasui Y, Cushing BM, Burgess AR, et al. Return to work following injury: the role of economic, social, and job-related factors. Am J Public Health. 1998;88:1630–7.CrossRef
33.
Kind P, Klose K, Gusi N, Olivares PR, Greiner W. Can adult weights be used to value child health states? Testing the influence of perspective in valuing EQ-5D-Y. Qual Life Res. 2015;24(10):2519–39.CrossRef
34.
Ringdal KG, Skaga NO, Hestnes M, Steen PA, Røislien J, Rehn M, et al. Abbreviated injury scale: Not a reliable basis for summation of injury severity in trauma facilities? Injury Int J Care Injured. 2012;44:691–9.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Health-related quality of life and return to work 1 year after major trauma from a network perspective
Authors
Jan C. van Ditshuizen
Esther M. M. van Lieshout
Ed F. van Beeck
Michiel H. J. Verhofstad
Dennis den Hartog
Dutch Trauma Registry Southwest
Publication date
12-09-2021
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery / Issue 3/2022
Print ISSN: 1863-9933
Electronic ISSN: 1863-9941
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-021-01781-2

Other articles of this Issue 3/2022

European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery 3/2022 Go to the issue

Original Article

A comparison between Asians and Caucasians in the dimensions of the femoral isthmus based on a 3D-CT analysis of 1189 adult femurs

Original Article

Short-term outcome of fragility fractures of the pelvis in the elderly treated with screw osteosynthesis and external fixator

Review Article

Extracellular vesicles as mediators and markers of acute organ injury: current concepts

Original Article

Functional outcomes of internal fixation of scapula fractures due to high-velocity gunshot injuries

Original Article

Revision rate is higher in patients with periprosthetic femur fractures following revision arthroplasty in comparison with ORIF following our algorithm: a two-center 1 analysis of 129 patients

Original Article

Risk factors for intraoperative greater trochanteric fractures in hemiarthroplasty for intracapsular femoral neck fractures