SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 2

The importance of the injury severity scores and revised trauma scores for moderate traumas: A state hospital experience

Yaralanma ciddiyeti skorları ve revize edilmiş travma skorlarının orta dereceli travmalar için önemi: Bir devlet hastanesi tecrübesi

Feray YILDIRIM AYDIN
Dilek GÜLGER
Pages
242–246
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

On the other hand, respiratory rate is an important marker, especially in penetrant moderate injuries.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:ABSTRACTBACKGROUND: The degree of damage presents a pressing issue in determining trauma severity.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, we aimed to evaluate the functionalities of these two trauma scoring systems, which are presently used frequently and have scientifically evolved at the state hospital level.METHODS: Following approval from the ethics committee to conduct clinical studies with retrospective archive screening, data between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2017, were retrospectively analysed for determining the factors affecting mortality in all patients diagnosed with traumatic injury in 29 Mayıs State Hospital.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:On the other hand, respiratory rate is an important marker, especially in penetrant moderate injuries.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2012 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

ABSTRACTBACKGROUND: The degree of damage presents a pressing issue in determining trauma severity. Various trauma-scoring systems, such as the injury severity and revised trauma scores, are used worldwide. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the functionalities of these two trauma scoring systems, which are presently used frequently and have scientifically evolved at the state hospital level.METHODS: Following approval from the ethics committee to conduct clinical studies with retrospective archive screening, data between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2017, were retrospectively analysed for determining the factors affecting mortality in all patients diagnosed with traumatic injury in 29 Mayıs State Hospital. Incomplete or unclear data were excluded from this study. Mean and standard deviation were used for continuous variables; percentage and frequency values were used for binary variables. For evaluating continuous variables, Student’s t-test or Mann–Whitney U-test was used in independent groups based on their distributionstatus. Dichotomous variables were evaluated using the chi-square test. The results and significant in univariate analyses were evaluated again by the linear and binary logistic regression model.RESULTS: Mean age of all patients was 37.53±14.47 years [male (35.68±13.9) versus female (40.61±15.1) (p=0.116)]. Mean injury trauma score for the general population was 3.18±8.46. No dissimilarity was noted regarding gender for the injury severity score (ISS) [(3.93±10.49 versus 1.91±2.34) (p=0.727)]. Regarding age, for revised trauma score (RTS), no statistical significance was noted [(7.60±0.91 versus 7.81±0.16) (p=0.207)]. Regarding the injury mechanism, we detected a difference between the two trauma scores; both ISS and RTS also had statistical significance. The results were found for ISS [penetrant (6.56±6.47) versus blunt (2.45±8.68)(p=0.002)] and for RTS [penetrant (7.41±0.54) versus blunt (7.74±0.79) (p=0.001)]. After the final statistics with logistic linear regression, the respiratory rate was statistically significant for penetrant injury [AOR 0.22 (0.001, 0.47) (p≤0.05)]. In the detailed subanalysis for RTS score components, respiratory rate was also significant in moderate traumas [AOR 0.22 (0.001, 0.47) (p=0.004)].CONCLUSION: Both ISS and RTS are nonsignificant in all moderate injury types. On the other hand, respiratory rate is an important marker, especially in penetrant moderate injuries.

Özet

AMAÇ: Hasarın derecesi, travmanın ciddiyetinin belirlenmesinde halen güncel ve önemli bir konudur. Bu amaçla dünyada çeşitli travma skorlama sistemleri kullanılmaktadır. Yaralanma şiddeti skoru ve revize travma skorları bunlardan biridir. Bu yazıda, şu anda sıklıkla kullanılan ve bilim tarafından büyük ölçüde olgunlaşan bu iki travma puanlama sisteminin işlevlerini devlet hastanesi düzeyinde değerlendirmeyi amaçladık.GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Geriye dönük arşiv taraması ile klinik çalışmalar yürütmek üzere etik kurul onayını takiben; 1 Ocak 2012 ve 31 Aralık 2017 tarihleri arasındaki veriler, 29 Mayıs Devlet Hastanesi’nde travmatik yaralanma tanısı alan tüm hastalarda mortaliteyi etkileyen faktörleri belirlemek amacıyla geriye dönük olarak incelendi. Eksik veya net olmayan veriler çalışmaya alınmadı. Sürekli değişkenler için basit ve standart sapma, ikili değişkenler için yüzde ve frekans değerleri kullanıldı. Sürekli değişkenlerin değerlendirilmesinde, bağımsız gruplarda dağılım durumuna göre Student t-testi veya Mann-Whitney U-testi kullanıldı. İkili değişkenler ki-kare testi ile değerlendirildi. Tek değişkenli analizlerde anlamlı olduğu tespit edilen değişkenler lineer ve ikili lojistik regresyon (LR) modeli ile tekrar değerlendirildi.BULGULAR: Tüm hastaların yaş ortalaması 37.53±14.47 yıldı [erkek (35.68±13.9) – kadın (40.61±15.1) – (p=0.116)]. Genel popülasyon için ortalama yaralanma travma skoru 3.18±8.46 idi. Yaralanma şiddeti skoru (ISS) cinsiyeti ile ilgili farklılık görülmemiştir [(3.93±10.49 ve 1.91±2.34) (p=0.727)]. Yaş ile ilgili olarak, gözden geçirilmiş travma skoru (RTS) için istatistiksel anlamlılık kaydedilmedi [(7.60±0.91’e karşılık 7.81±0.16) (p=0.207)]. Yaralanma mekanizması ile ilgili olarak, iki travma skoru arasında bir fark saptandı; hem ISS hem de RTS’nin istatistiksel önemi vardı. Sonuçlar ISS [penetrant (6.56±6.47) ile künt (2.45±8.68) (p=0.002)] ve RTS [penetrant (7.41±0.54) ile künt (7.74±0.79) (p=0.001)] için bulundu. Lojistik lineer regresyon ile son istatistiklerden sonra, penetran yaralanma için solunum hızı istatistiksel olarak anlamlı idi [AOR 0.22 (0.001, 0.47) (p

🔖

Cite This Article

AYDIN, F. Y., GÜLGER, D. (2022). The importance of the injury severity scores and revised trauma scores for moderate traumas: A state hospital experience. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 2, 242–246. https://ajindex.com/articles/644186

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Roy N, Gerdin M, Schneider E, Kizhakke Veetil DK, Khajanchi M, Kumar V, et al. Validation of international trauma scoring systems in urban trauma centres in India. Injury 2016;47:2459−64
  2. Stevenson M, Segui-Gomez M, Lescohier I, Di Scala C, McDonaldSmith G. An overview of the injury severity score and the new injury severity score. Inj Prev 2001;7:10–3
  3. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. The abbreviated injury scale. Ilinois, U.S.A: AAAM;1990
  4. Wisner DH. History and current status of trauma scoring systems. Arch Surg 1992;127:111–7
  5. Baker SP, O’Neill B, Haddon W Jr, Long WB. The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care. J Trauma 1974;14:187–96
  6. Soni KD, Mahindrakar S, Gupta A, Kumar S, Sagar S, Jhakal A. Comparison of ISS, NISS, and RTS score as predictor of mortality in pediatric fall. Burns Trauma 2017;5:25
  7. Champion HR, Copes WS, Sacco WJ, Lawnick MM, Keast SL, Bain LW Jr, et al. The Major Trauma Outcome Study: establishing national norms for trauma care. J Trauma 1990;30:1356−65
  8. MacKenzie EJ, Shapiro S, Eastham JN Jr. Rating AIS severity using emergency department sheets vs. inpatient charts. J Trauma 1985;25:984–8
  9. Chawda MN, Hildebrand F, Pape HC, Giannoudis PV. Predicting outcome after multiple trauma: which scoring system?. Injury 2004;35:347– 58
  10. Ghag G, Jagdale A. Correlation of PTS, RTS or ISS with length of hospital stay in paediatric trauma patients. JCDR 2018;12:PC05−7
  11. Bickell WH, Stern S. Fluid replacement for hypotensive injury victims: how, when and what risks?. Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology 1998;11:177−80
  12. Bickell WH, Barrett SM, Romine-Jenkins M, Hull SS Jr, Kinasewitz GT. Resuscitation of canine hemorrhagic hypotension with large-volume isotonic crystalloid: impact on lung water, venous admixture, and systemic arterial oxygen saturation. Am J Emerg Med 1994;12:36–42
  13. Branas CC, Sing RF, Davidson SJ. Urban trauma transport of assaulted patients using nonmedical personnel. Acad Emerg Med 1995;2:486–93
  14. Dalton AM. Prehospital intravenous fluid replacement in trauma: an outmoded concept?. J R Soc Med 1995;88:213P–6P
  15. Kaweski SM, Sise MJ, Virgilio RW. The effect of prehospital fluids on survival in trauma patients. J Trauma 1990;30:1215–9
  16. Dula DJ, Wood GC, Rejmer AR, Starr M, Leicht M. Use of prehospital fluids in hypotensive blunt trauma patients. Prehosp Emerg Care 2002;6:417–20
  17. Talvin