Multiple Casualty Incidents at a Level I Trauma Center: A 15-year Analysis

Limited evidence regarding multiple casualty outcomes exists. Given resource strain with increasing patient load, we hypothesized that patients involved in a multiple casualty incident have worse outcomes compared to standard trauma patients.

Multiple casualty victims from 2006 to 2021 at our institution were identified; admission data and trauma outcomes were then compared to standard trauma patients. Chi-square tests and Mann-Whitney U-tests were performed for categorical and non-normal continuous data, respectively. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate associations with mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission.

We identified 39,924 patients, of which 612 were multiple casualty patients (1.5%). Multiple casualty involvement was associated with younger age (29 y versus 44 y, P < 0.001) and higher rates of penetrating trauma (26.1% versus 21.4%; P < 0.001). Multiple casualty involvement was associated with higher injury severity score (ISS) (11.6 versus 7.9, P < 0.001), mortality (2.4% versus 1.5% P < 0.005), and ICU admission (17% versus 13%, P < 0.005). On logistic regression analysis, age, ISS, shock index, presence of the COVID-19 pandemic, and mechanism all independently predicted mortality (P ≤ 0.003), while multiple casualty involvement did not (P = 0.302).

Although multiple casualty incidents are associated with patient factors that increase hospital resource strain, when controlling for age, ISS, shock index, presence of the COVID-19 pandemic, and trauma mechanism, involvement in multiple casualty incident was not independently associated with ICU admission or mortality. Improved understanding of the impact of high-volume trauma may allow us to improve our care of this at-risk population.