Each year, physical traumas affect over one billion people worldwide, generating a substantial burden in terms of mortality, disability and productivity loss. The period following hospital discharge, encompassing the transition to home, short-term stays in rehabilitation facilities, as well as outpatient and community-based follow-up care, represents a critical phase in the recovery process for trauma injury patients. Yet, this phase remains poorly documented. We aim to (1) Map data on assessment strategies for various outcomes among trauma survivors after hospital discharge, including the tools used and how they are administered, as well as the resources required, and the barriers and facilitators to their implementation, and (2) Compare the feasibility of implementing the assessment strategies while considering response rates, resource use, costs and sustainability.

We will conduct a scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. We will search MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and PsycINFO for studies published since 1990 to reflect the evolution of contemporary follow-up practices, including the emergence of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and digital tools. There will be no language restrictions. We will consider all studies involving trauma survivors, focusing on the evaluation of postdischarge health outcomes. Two independent reviewers will screen studies and extract data on population characteristics, assessment strategies and feasibility. Results will be analysed thematically and presented narratively. We will present counts and percentages for each assessment strategy, along with its characteristics and associated barriers and facilitators. Subgroup analyses will also be conducted based on clinical and social determinants and contextual factors.

Ethics approval is not required for this review. The results of this scoping review will be shared through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, conference presentations and our network of knowledge users.

DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/KZHS4

Transporting critically ill patients between medical facilities can be hazardous and costly. Whether by road, fixed-wing aircraft or helicopter, many professional associations have proposed strategies to efficiently and safely transport patients at high risk of instability. Although these strategies have been assessed in some studies, no comprehensive synthesis of their benefits has been conducted to date. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of strategies to improve the safety and costs of interhospital transports for critically ill patients.

We will conduct a systematic review according to the Cochrane guidelines. The review will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies and case-control studies assessing the effect of interventions to improve interhospital transports of critically ill patients on safety and costs. We will search multiple electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library) from inception to 6 months prior to the submission of the final manuscript. Screening by title and abstract, full-text screening, data extraction and quality assessment will be performed by two independent reviewers. We will assess the risk of bias with the Cochrane revised tool for RCTs and with the risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions tool. If possible, we will calculate pooled effect estimates and 95% CIs to assess the effect of the interventions. We will also assess heterogeneity using the I² index and rate the certainty of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool and trial sequential analysis.

Ethics approval is not required for this review. The results of this systematic review will be shared through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, conference presentations and our network of knowledge user collaborators.

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42024595080).