Zarzaur, Ben L.Bell, Teresa2017-08-142017-08-142016-05-01Zarzaur, B. L., & Bell, T. (2016). Trajectory Subtypes After Injury and Patient Centered Outcomes. The Journal of Surgical Research, 202(1), 103–110. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.12.038https://hdl.handle.net/1805/13834BACKGROUND: The recent focus on patient-centered outcomes highlights the need to better describe recovery trajectories after injury. The purpose of this study was to characterize recovery trajectory subtypes that exist after non-neurologic injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, observational cohort of 500 adults with an Injury Severity Score > 10 but without traumatic brain or spinal cord injury from 2009 to 2011 was formed. The Short Form-36 was administered at admission and repeated at 1, 2, 4, and 12 mo after injury. Group-based trajectory modeling was used to determine the number and shape of physical composite score (PCS) and mental composite score (MCS) trajectories. RESULTS: Three PCS trajectories and five MCS trajectories were identified. For PCS, trajectory 1 (10.4%) has low baseline scores, followed by no improvement over time. Trajectory 2 (65.6%) declines 1 mo after injury then improves over time. Trajectory 3 (24.1%) has a sharp decline followed by rapid recovery. For MCS, trajectory 1 (9.4%) is low at baseline and remains low. Trajectory 2 (14.4%) has a large decrease after injury and does not recover over the next 12 mo. Trajectory 3 (22.7%) has an initial decrease in MCS early, followed by continuous recovery. Trajectory 4 (19.1%) has a steady decline over the study period. Trajectory 5 (34.3%) stays consistently high at all time points. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery after injury is complex and results in multiple recovery trajectories. This has implications for patient-centered clinical trial design and in development of patient-specific interventions to improve outcomes.en-USPublisher PolicyQuality of lifeRecovery TrajectoriesInjuryTraumaArticle