Skip to main content

Three decades (1978–2008) of Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS™) practice revised and evidence revisited

Abstract

The Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) Program was developed to teach doctors one safe, reliable method to assess and initially manage the trauma patient. The ATLS principles represents an organized approach for evaluation and management of seriously injured patients and offers a foundation of common knowledge for all members of the trauma team. After 3 decades of teaching (1978–2008) of ATLS worldwide one should intuitively perceive that the evidence for the effect of ATLS teaching on the improved management of the injured patient be well established. This editorial addresses aspects of trauma education with needs for further development of better evidence of best practice.

The Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS®) Program was developed to teach doctors one safe, reliable method to assess and initially manage the trauma patient. The ATLS principles represents an organized approach for evaluation and management of seriously injured patients and offers a foundation of common knowledge for all members of the trauma team The concept is simple, and based on the mnemonic "ABCDE" order of which priority takes place in management of the injured patient: A irway and cervical spine protection; B reathing; C irculation; D isability, and; E xposure/E nvironment. The emphasis is on the critical "first hour" of care, focusing on initial assessment, lifesaving intervention, reevaluation, stabilization, and, when necessary, transfer to a trauma center. Obviously the approach is justified, as about 30% of all inhospital trauma deaths occur within the first hour of injury, and 3 in 4 inhospital trauma deaths occur within the first 48 hours [1].

ATLS was developed by the American College of Surgeons (ACS) following the tragic 1976 event of an orthopedic surgeon piloting his plane, who crashed into a Nebraska cornfield with his family, causing severe injuries to his 3 children and the death of his wife – a story retold by himself 30 years later [2]. Insufficiency in the system was noted by the care received at the primary care facility, leading to a call for a systems change that began in Nebraska [3], and in 1978 the first ATLS course was held [4]. For over three decades (1978–2008) the ATLS course has changed in-hospital management of major trauma patients and is now accepted as a standard of care in over 50 countries worldwide and has been thought to about 1 million physicians, including Europe and Scandinavian countries since the mid 1990s [58].

The ATLS® Student Course Manual is updated approximately every four years. The 8th edition was released in October this year, featuring over 100 color images and including a DVD with skills from the course demonstrated in video segments [9]. Practice has been revised according to "best evidence" [9], acknowledging that the principles in ATLS is not necessarily reflecting the forefront of trauma care as practiced in busy, large-volume (academic) trauma centers. Rather, the principles of practice take aim to provide a basic understanding and logic in the safe management of the injured patient independent of institution location and resources. Acknowledging the increasing global impact of ATLS, the review committee has included a broader international panel in the development of evidence-based, expert opinions. Several changes have resulted in the new edition, including a chapter on disaster management, and revisions of recommendations for specific injuries/conditions, such as no current support for the use of steroids in spinal cord trauma and, in pediatric trauma that physiologic changes/blood loss should guide the use of laparotomy/embolization rather than the finding of a splenic injury and a blush on CT per se [9]. For many practicing clinicians dealing with trauma patients these statements will not be new, but nonetheless represents a standard for which the inexperienced or untrained are now taught to manage these conditions.

After 3 decades of teaching, practice and implementation of ATLS worldwide one should intuitively perceive that the evidence for the effect of ATLS teaching on the improved management of the injured patient be well established. Fact is, besides a few studies demonstrating the effect on process of care by mandatory implementation of ATLS training [1012], and studies investigating the effect of having ATLS skills in a simulation environment [1315], very little "real-world" evidence exists on the true effect on trauma mortality per se. In a systematic review [16] comparing effectiveness of hospitals with an ATLS-trained trauma response system versus hospitals without such a response system in reducing mortality and morbidity following trauma, the authors found no clear evidence that ATLS training (or similar) impacts on the outcome for victims of trauma. However, there is some evidence that educational initiatives improve knowledge of what to do in emergency situations [16]. Further, there is no evidence that trauma management systems incorporating ATLS training impact positively on outcome [16]. Future research should concentrate on the evaluation of trauma systems incorporating ATLS, both within hospitals and at the health system level, by using rigorous research designs.

Similarly, a systematic review of ATLS in the prehospital setting could find no hard evidence of either positive, nor negative effect on outcome [17] – however, no level I studies were found on the subject, thus hampering drawing any firm conclusions. Further, conclusions may differ according to geographic region and type of crew investigated (ambulance crew vs physicians), e.g. with no difference demonstrated in a large Canadian study on prehospital advanced life support [18], while a positive impact of applying physician-performed prehospital advanced life support in a Norwegian system [19]. Core topics of controversy include perceived high-risk procedures (such as prehospital intubation) which mandates proper training and utility [20].

Obviously, education of advanced trauma life support principles, with the ATLS™ Course in a current leading forefront, has changed how the trained physician thinks and perceives initial evaluation of the traumatized patient, and has been met by enthusiasm in most instances. However, recognition of perceived shortcomings such as the utility and recommendations for diagnostic imaging [21], high costs, low compliance (even among general surgeons in the US) [22], and critique of the predomination of "North-American principles" and the organization's rigidity on change has spurred discussion on the value of ATLS, in particular outside the US [2326] and even the development of a European alternative course [27]. In addition, supplementary education, including team-training using crew resource management (CRM) principles has been recognized and introduced in Norway [28], and is now implemented alongside ATLS training in a national scale [29]. Alternative training models are made mandatory in areas where high-risk, low-volume life-saving procedures might be performed [30, 31]. Just as trauma does not respect the borders of organ systems or medical disciplines, training for the complex management of injured patients needs several approaches and solutions to the educational challenge.

References

  1. 1.

    Søreide K, Krüger AJ, Vardal AL, Ellingsen CL, Søreide E, Lossius HM: Epidemiology and contemporary patterns of trauma deaths: changing place, similar pace, older face. World J Surg. 2007, 31 (11): 2092-2103. 10.1007/s00268-007-9226-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Styner JK: The birth of Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS). Surgeon. 2006, 4 (3): 163-165.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Collicott PE: Advanced trauma life support course, an improvement in rural trauma care. Nebr Med J. 1979, 64 (9): 279-280.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Collicott PE, Hughes I: Training in advanced trauma life support. JAMA. 1980, 243 (11): 1156-1159. 10.1001/jama.243.11.1156.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    van Vugt AB: ['Advanced trauma life support' in Netherlands]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2000, 144 (44): 2093-2097.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Scharplatz D, Sutter PM, Ummenhofer W: [ATLS (advanced trauma life support) in Switzerland]. Swiss Surg. 2000, 6 (6): 343-346. 10.1024/1023-9332.6.6.343.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Rastad J, Lindebert T: ["Advanced trauma life support" in Sweden. A flying start for trauma education]. Lakartidningen. 1996, 93 (30–31): 2660-2661.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Skinner DV: Advanced trauma life support. Injury. 1993, 24 (3): 147-148. 10.1016/0020-1383(93)90277-D.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Kortbeek JB, Al Turki SA, Ali J, Antoine JA, Bouillon B, Brasel K, Brenneman F, Brink PR, Brohi K, Burris D, et al: Advanced trauma life support, 8th edition, the evidence for change. J Trauma. 2008, 64 (6): 1638-1650.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Olson CJ, Arthur M, Mullins RJ, Rowland D, Hedges JR, Mann NC: Influence of trauma system implementation on process of care delivered to seriously injured patients in rural trauma centers. Surgery. 2001, 130 (2): 273-279. 10.1067/msy.2001.115898.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    van Olden GD, Meeuwis JD, Bolhuis HW, Boxma H, Goris RJ: Clinical impact of advanced trauma life support. Am J Emerg Med. 2004, 22 (7): 522-525. 10.1016/j.ajem.2004.08.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    van Olden GD, Meeuwis JD, Bolhuis HW, Boxma H, Goris RJ: Advanced trauma life support study: quality of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. J Trauma. 2004, 57 (2): 381-384. 10.1097/01.TA.0000096645.13484.E6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Quilici AP, Pogetti RS, Fontes B, Zantut LF, Chaves ET, Birolini D: Is the Advanced Trauma Life Support simulation exam more stressful for the surgeon than emergency department trauma care?. Clinics. 2005, 60 (4): 287-292. 10.1590/S1807-59322005000400005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Ali J, Cohen RJ, Gana TJ, Al-Bedah KF: Effect of the Advanced Trauma Life Support program on medical students' performance in simulated trauma patient management. J Trauma. 1998, 44 (4): 588-591. 10.1097/00005373-199804000-00005.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Williams MJ, Lockey AS, Culshaw MC: Improved trauma management with advanced trauma life support (ATLS) training. J Accid Emerg Med. 1997, 14 (2): 81-83.

    PubMed Central  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Shakiba H, Dinesh S, Anne MK: Advanced trauma life support training for hospital staff. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004, CD004173-3

  17. 17.

    Sethi D, Kwan I, Kelly AM, Roberts I, Bunn F: Advanced trauma life support training for ambulance crews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001, CD003109-2

  18. 18.

    Stiell IG, Nesbitt LP, Pickett W, Munkley D, Spaite DW, Banek J, Field B, Luinstra-Toohey L, Maloney J, Dreyer J, et al: The OPALS Major Trauma Study: impact of advanced life-support on survival and morbidity. CMAJ. 2008, 178 (9): 1141-1152.

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Lossius HM, Soreide E, Hotvedt R, Hapnes SA, Eielsen OV, Forde OH, Steen PA: Prehospital advanced life support provided by specially trained physicians: is there a benefit in terms of life years gained?. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2002, 46 (7): 771-778. 10.1034/j.1399-6576.2002.460703.x.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Sollid SJ, Heltne JK, Soreide E, Lossius HM: Pre-hospital advanced airway management by anaesthesiologists: Is there still room for improvement?. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2008, 16 (1): 2-10.1186/1757-7241-16-2.

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Kool DR, Blickman JG: Advanced Trauma Life Support. ABCDE from a radiological point of view. Emerg Radiol. 2007, 14 (3): 135-141. 10.1007/s10140-007-0633-x.

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Esposito TJ, Kuby A, Unfred C, Gamelli RL: General surgeons and the Advanced Trauma Life Support course: is it time to refocus?. J Trauma. 1995, 39 (5): 929-933. 10.1097/00005373-199511000-00018. discussion 933-924.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Thies KC, Nagele P: [Advanced Trauma Life Support – a standard of care for Germany? No substantial improvement of care can be expected]. Anaesthesist. 2007, 56 (11): 1147-1154. 10.1007/s00101-007-1254-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Nolan JP: Advanced trauma life support in the United Kingdom: time to move on. Emerg Med J. 2005, 22 (1): 3-4. 10.1136/emj.2004.018507.

    PubMed Central  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Driscoll P, Wardrope J: ATLS: past, present, and future. Emerg Med J. 2005, 22 (1): 2-3. 10.1136/emj.2004.021212.

    PubMed Central  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Ummenhofer W, Scheidegger D: What is the future of advanced trauma life support training?. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 1999, 12 (6): 695-700. 10.1097/00001503-199912000-00011.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Thies K, Gwinnutt C, Driscoll P, Carneiro A, Gomes E, Araujo R, Cassar MR, Davis M: The European Trauma Course – from concept to course. Resuscitation. 2007, 74 (1): 135-141. 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2007.02.011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Brattebo G, Wisborg T, Brattebo J, Brinchmann-Hansen A: [Better trauma therapy – BEST or ATLS?]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2001, 121 (4): 505-506.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Wisborg T, Brattebo G, Brinchmann-Hansen A, Uggen PE, Hansen KS: Effects of nationwide training of multiprofessional trauma teams in norwegian hospitals. J Trauma. 2008, 64 (6): 1613-1618.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Søreide K, Søiland H, Lossius HM, Vetrhus M, Søreide JA, Søreide E: Resuscitative emergency thoracotomy in a Scandinavian trauma hospital – is it justified?. Injury. 2007, 38 (1): 34-42. 10.1016/j.injury.2006.06.125.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Gaarder C, Naess PA, Buanes T, Pillgram-Larsen J: Advanced surgical trauma care training with a live porcine model. Injury. 2005, 36 (6): 718-724. 10.1016/j.injury.2004.12.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kjetil Søreide.

Additional information

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

KS perceived the concept and drafted the article.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Søreide, K. Three decades (1978–2008) of Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS™) practice revised and evidence revisited. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 16, 19 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-16-19

Download citation

Keywords

  • Trauma Patient
  • Injured Patient
  • Splenic Injury
  • Trauma Team
  • Advance Trauma Life Support