Mobile Phone-administered Triage Tool to Followup on Discharged Trauma Patients

This is a numerical measure that represents the sum of the positive responses that participants give to each question that assesses the acceptability of mobile phones as a follow-up tool. The scale for the acceptability score of mobile phones as a follow-up tool ranges from 0 to 6, where 0 means the participant's responses indicate the participant believes mobile phones are definitely not an acceptable follow-up tool and 6 means the participant's responses indicate the participant believes mobile phones are definitely an acceptable follow-up tool.

Time frame: 2 weeks after enrollment

Population: The acceptability tool was administered to a subset of patients.

This measure is median monthly costs incurred to pay the research assistant for the time s/he spends making the required phone calls per patient.

Time frame: At the end of the study (2 weeks after the 2-year intervention phase (extended due to COVID))

This measure is the median costs incurred to make phone calls per patient in each study phase.

Time frame: At the end of the study (2 weeks after the 2-year intervention phase (extended due to COVID))

This is the median number of call attempts made until a research assistant is able to successfully administer the questionnaire(s) planned for that phone call.

Time frame: 2 weeks after enrollment

Population: There was missing data for this variable hence the discrepancy between the overall number of participants analyzed for this variable and participants in the study. Missing data were dropped from the analysis.

After a physician examines a participant, s/he will determine whether s/he thinks the participant is at low, moderate or high risk for a poor outcome (HR) without additional intervention using subjective clinical assessment.

Time frame: Immediately after the physician administers the physical exam (i.e. about 3 weeks after enrollment)

Population: Physician examination occurred only in the intervention phase where participants who were administered the telephone triage tool were asked to return for a physician examination to cross-validate tool finding. The number analyzed represents the number of patients who returned for the physician examination.

This is a binary measure. After a physician examines a participant, s/he will determine whether s/he thinks the participant would benefit from further services (including additional follow-up care, and/or diagnostic or therapeutic interventions).

Time frame: Immediately after the physician administers the physical exam (i.e. about 3 weeks after enrollment)

Population: Physician examination occurred only in the intervention phase where participants who were administered the telephone triage tool were asked to return for a physician examination to cross-validate tool finding. The number analyzed represents the number of patients who returned for the physician examination.

This will be calculated as follows: The denominator will be the number of discharged trauma patients enrolled in the study. The numerator will be the number of discharged trauma patients enrolled in the study who seek any clinical follow-up evaluation at the 2 weeks post-discharge phonecall.

Time frame: After the 2week post-discharge phonecall.

Population: There was missing data for this variable hence the discrepancy between the overall number of participants analyzed for this variable and participants in the study. Missing data were dropped from the analysis.

The number of successful contacts will be divided by the total number of contacts. A successful contact is when an enrolled patient answered the phone, and consented to the research assistant administering the questionnaire(s) planned for that phone call.

Time frame: 2 weeks after enrollment

This measure will be calculated based on how much time it takes to administer the telephone triage tool.

Time frame: After administration of the telephone triage tool (i.e. about 2 weeks after enrollment)

Population: Telephone triage tool was the intervention and was only administered in the intervention phase. There was missing data for this variable hence the discrepancy between the overall number of participants analyzed for this variable and participants in the study. Missing data were dropped from the analysis.

To develop a sensitive model capable of risk stratifying triaged patients for high risk (HR), all candidate questions from the telephone triage tool found to associate with HR on univariate regression were weighted by their predictive coefficient and added to generate a triage risk score (TRS) ranging from a minimum score of 0 (lowest risk) to a maximum possible score of 43.9 (highest risk). Triage Risk Score (TRS) less than or equal to 1.3 (1st quartile) was designated as low risk, TRS 1.4 to 4.0 (2nd & 3rd quartile) as moderate risk, and TRS greater than or equal to 4.1 (fourth quartile) as high risk.

Time frame: At the end of intervention phase (about 1 year after enrollment).

Population: The telephone triage tool was administered only in the intervention phase. The number analyzed represents the subset of patients who returned for the physician examination.

Participants were asked if following the injury it became more difficult for the family to afford expenses such as food and rent.

Time frame: At the 2week post-discharge telephone phonecall.

Population: There was missing data for this variable hence the discrepancy between the overall number of participants analyzed for this variable and participants in the study. Missing data were dropped from the analysis.

Participants were asked if following the injury the family had to borrow money to meet up with expenses.

Time frame: At the 2week post-discharge telephone phonecall.

Population: There was missing data for this variable hence the discrepancy between the overall number of participants analyzed for this variable and participants in the study. Missing data were dropped from the analysis.

Participants were asked if following the injury the family had to spend their savings.

Time frame: At the 2week post-discharge telephone phonecall.

Population: There was missing data for this variable hence the discrepancy between the overall number of participants analyzed for this variable and participants in the study. Missing data were dropped from the analysis.

The GOSE disability level that participants in the study report. For each participant, GOSE disability level will be determined using the augmented GOSE (aGOSE) instrument, which assesses factors like the participant's independence inside and outside the home, work, social and leisure activities, family and friendship, etc. Each time after administration of the aGOSE instrument, the participant's GOSE disability level will be calculated. The aGOSE score is reported for the 2-week post-discharge timepoint. The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) is a global scale for functional outcome that rates patient status into one of five categories (worse to best respectively): Dead, Vegetative State, Severe Disability, Moderate Disability or Good Recovery. The Extended GOS (GOSE) which was used in this study provides more detailed categorization into eight categories by subdividing the categories of severe disability, moderate disability and good recovery into a lower and upper category.

Time frame: At the 2week post-discharge telephone phonecall.

Population: There was missing data for this variable hence the discrepancy between the overall number of participants analyzed for this variable and participants in the study. Missing data were dropped from the analysis.