OBJECTIVES: To determine whether it was feasible to use a haemorrhage assessment tool (HAT) within a trauma trial and whether the data obtained could differentiate patients who had achieved haemostasis. BACKGROUND: Major haemorrhage is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, affecting 40% of trauma patients. Clinical trials evaluating haemostatic interventions often use transfusion outcomes as a primary endpoint. Transfusion is highly dependent on local practice, limiting its reliability as a robust, transferable endpoint. METHODS: A five-point HAT questionnaire was applied to participants enrolled into the EFIT-1 trial. This RCT evaluated the feasibility of administering a 6 g fibrinogen concentrate to patients with severe trauma haemorrhage. RESULTS: Of participants, 98% completed a HAT; 75% participants had 'achieved haemostasis' at the time of tool completion, as determined by clinical acumen alone. HAT scores were able to differentiate which participants required transfusion after 3 h. Of participants, 56% were transfused red blood cells when they scored 0-2, compared to 17% with HAT scores between 3 and 5. CONCLUSION: This study has confirmed the feasibility of using a HAT during the emergency care of patients suffering trauma haemorrhage, and future studies should be conducted to determine its value as an endpoint in haemostasis studies.
454 - 459
haemorrhage asssessment tool, major haemorrhage, randomised controlled trial, trauma, Emergency Medical Services, Erythrocyte Transfusion, Female, Hemorrhage, Hemostasis, Humans, Male, Pilot Projects, Surveys and Questionnaires, Wounds and Injuries