Comparison Of Trauma Scores For Predicting Mortality And Morbidity On Trauma Patients
Reyhan Orhon, Şevki Hakan Eren, Şule Karadayı, İlhan Korkmaz, Abuzer Coşkun, Mehmet Nesimi Eren, Nurkay Katrancıoğlu
Abstract
Open-access reader
Reyhan Orhon, Şevki Hakan Eren, Şule Karadayı, İlhan Korkmaz, Abuzer Coşkun, Mehmet Nesimi Eren, Nurkay Katrancıoğlu
Abstract
Open-access reader
BACKGROUND: In this study, we compared the anatomical, and physiological scoring systems trauma revised injury severity score (TRISS), revised trauma score (RTS), injury severity score (ISS), new injury severity score (NISS) to each other, to find out the most accurate and reliable trauma score for the risk classification of morbidity and mortality among the trauma patients. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study, which included 633 patients who admitted to our University Hospital Emergency Department during an 8-month period due to trauma. All blunt and penetrating traumas (traffic accident, assault, etc.) patients above 16 years were included. RESULTS: Arrival time trauma scores (ISS, NISS, RTS, and TRISS) of the patients was calculated. Mean trauma score for the mortality prediction was calculated, and the p value was equal for all (p=0.001). Trauma scores were also analyzed for the hospitalization time in intensive care unit (ICU). While NISS, RTS, and TRISS values were significant (p=0.048, p=0.048, and p=0.017, respectively), ISS value was not significant (p=0.257) for predicting the ICU hospitalization time. Only TRISS was a good predictor for the mechanically ventilation time in ICU patients (p=0.01). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, we determined that the anatomical trauma scores (NISS, ISS) predicted the hospitalization and ICU necessities better, whereas TRISS, an anatomo-physiological trauma score, defined the ICU hospitalization and mechanically ventilation time better.
OpenAlex reports 98 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
BACKGROUND: In this study, we compared the anatomical, and physiological scoring systems trauma revised injury severity score (TRISS), revised trauma score (RTS), injury severity score (ISS), new injury severity score (NISS) to each other, to find out the most accurate and reliable trauma score for the risk classification of morbidity and mortality among the trauma patients. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study, which included 633 patients who admitted to our University Hospital Emergency Department during an 8-month period due to trauma. All blunt and penetrating traumas (traffic accident, assault, etc.) patients above 16 years were included. RESULTS: Arrival time trauma scores (ISS, NISS, RTS, and TRISS) of the patients was calculated. Mean trauma score for the mortality prediction was calculated, and the p value was equal for all (p=0.001). Trauma scores were also analyzed for the hospitalization time in intensive care unit (ICU). While NISS, RTS, and TRISS values were significant (p=0.048, p=0.048, and p=0.017, respectively), ISS value was not significant (p=0.257) for predicting the ICU hospitalization time. Only TRISS was a good predictor for the mechanically ventilation time in ICU patients (p=0.01). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, we determined that the anatomical trauma scores (NISS, ISS) predicted the hospitalization and ICU necessities better, whereas TRISS, an anatomo-physiological trauma score, defined the ICU hospitalization and mechanically ventilation time better.
Key concepts: Medicine, Injury Severity Score, Revised Trauma Score, Emergency medicine, Intensive care unit, Blunt trauma, Mechanical ventilation, Penetrating trauma