Trauma And Injury Severity Score Research Articles

Comparative Evaluation of Mortality Predictors in Trauma Patients: A Prospective Single-center Observational Study Assessing Injury Severity Score Revised Trauma Score Trauma and Injury Severity Score and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II Scores.

This prospective cohort study aimed to compare the predictive accuracy of outcome (survival/death) among trauma patients using various prognostic scores. Over 3 months, 240 trauma patients in a tertiary care hospital were assessed for demographic details, trauma characteristics, vital signs, Glasgow coma scale, arterial blood gas values, and lab markers. Injury severity score (ISS), revised trauma score (RTS), trauma and injury severity score (TRISS), and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) were applied at admission, 24 hours, and 48 hours post-admission. Road traffic accidents (55.83%) were the primary cause of trauma, followed by falls (33.75%) and violence (10.41%). The all-cause mortality rate was 23.33%, with 34.16% requiring ICU admission. Head injuries (65.83%) were both the most frequent injury site and cause of mortality. Analysis indicated that APACHE II outperformed other scores in predicting outcomes, with ISS following closely. The study concludes that trauma severity correlates with ICU admission and mortality, emphasizing APACHE II as a superior predictor, particularly for traumatic brain injuries leading to ICU admission and mortality. This study contributes to the existing body of knowledge by addressing the gap in comparing prognostic abilities among scoring systems for trauma patients. The unexpected superiority of APACHE II suggests its potential as a valuable tool in predicting outcomes in this specific patient population. Gupta J, Kshirsagar S, Naik S, Pande A. Comparative Evaluation of Mortality Predictors in Trauma Patients: A Prospective Single-center Observational Study Assessing Injury Severity Score Revised Trauma Score Trauma and Injury Severity Score and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II Scores. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(5):475-482.

Comparison of Sensitivity, Specificity, and Accuracy of ISS, RTS, and TRISS Instruments in Predicting Mortality of Trauma Patients

This study aims to compare the effectiveness of three trauma scoring systems—Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS)—in predicting mortality among trauma patients at Inche Abdoel Moeis Regional General Hospital Samarinda's emergency room. Trauma assessment tools are crucial for reducing mortality rates and enhancing patient outcomes. While ISS focuses on anatomical factors, RTS integrates physiological parameters, and TRISS combines both for a comprehensive evaluation. Previous research suggests their effectiveness in mortality prediction, albeit with variations in performance. The absence of a dedicated trauma assessment system at the hospital underscores the urgency of this research. By evaluating the performance of ISS, RTS, and TRISS, this study aims to inform clinical practice and enhance trauma patient management, ultimately reducing mortality rates and improving outcomes in the emergency room setting. The study's methodology involves retrospective analysis of trauma patient data, including demographics, injury characteristics, and outcomes. Statistical analysis will compare the performance of the three scoring systems in predicting mortality with implications for trauma care protocols and resource allocation. Results will contribute to evidence-based decision-making in emergency room settings, facilitating more accurate triage and treatment strategies for trauma patients.

On the Feasibility of Using REBOA Technology for the Treatment of Patients with Polytrauma

Introduction According to domestic and foreign authors, the leading cause of death in victims with polytrauma is blood loss. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is one of the new promising ways to manage bleeding in patients in a state of traumatic shock. There are a large number of publications in the world scientific literature indicating the high effectiveness of this technology in the treatment of bleeding. However, in the Russian Federation, this method has not yet entered into everyday practice, and scientific research on this matter is scarce. AIM Based on literature data and analysis of our own sample, to justify the need to use REBOA technology for the treatment of victims with polytrauma.Material and methods A retrospective analysis of the medical records of patients with polytrauma admitted to the N.V. Sklifosovsky Research Institute for Emergency Medicine in 2021 was carried out. Data from medical records and the Results of forensic medical examinations were studied. The main sample included victims with polytrauma (Injury Severity Score, ISS, of more than 17 points) delivered from the scene of the incident in a state of traumatic shock (systolic blood pressure, SBP, of less than 90 mm Hg) and a verified source of bleeding. To assess the potential survival of victims, we used the Trauma Score and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) scale.Results Of the 92 patients with polytrauma, 19 patients (20.6%) had indications for REBOA. The most common sources of bleeding were injuries to the pelvic ring, 14 (73.7%), abdomen, 11 (57.9%), and chest, 7 (36.8%). In 6 victims (31.5%), there were combined abdomen and pelvic injuries as the area of blood loss. The mean age of the victims was 48.8±19.9 years, the mean ISS value was 39.4±20.1. On admission, the mean SBP was 62.4±31.5 mm Hg, and heart rate — 91.8±43.3 beats/min. In 8 victims (42.1%), norepinephrine was administered immediately upon hospitalization at an average dose of 837.5±537.0 ng/kg/min. As a result of their injuries, 15 patients (78.9%) died, and 4 were discharged from the hospital. According to the Conclusions of forensic experts, the leading cause of death was blood loss in 11 (61.1%), severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) in 4 (22.2%), and infectious complications in 3 cases (16.7%).The TRISS was calculated for each patient. In order to identify the most potentially viable patients with indications for REBOA, we excluded 5 patients with severe TBI (the mean TRISS was 20.9±11.1%), and 5 patients with the TRISS of less than 50% (the mean TRISS was 10.0±14.1%), the latter died from hemorrhagic shock. Among the remaining 9 patients with higher TRISS values, 5 (26.3%) who died had the mean TRISS of 80.5±15.8%, comparable to the mean TRISS of 83.3±2.4% in the 4 survivors.Conclusion 1. According to foreign and domestic publications, the technology of resuscitation endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is effective for stopping internal bleeding in patients with polytrauma. 2. When analyzing our own sample of patients, it was proven that 20.6% of patients with polytrauma had indications for the use of REBOA. Most of them (78.9%) died. The main cause of death was hemorrhagic shock. 3. About a quarter of patients (26.3%) with indications for REBOA had a potentially high chance of survival. In the future, the use of this technology may reduce the number of deaths.

Comparison of nine trauma scoring systems in prediction of inhospital outcomes of pediatric trauma patients: a multicenter study

Hereby, we aimed to comprehensively compare different scoring systems for pediatric trauma and their ability to predict in-hospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The current registry-based multicenter study encompassed a comprehensive dataset of 6709 pediatric trauma patients aged ≤ 18 years from July 2016 to September 2023. To ascertain the predictive efficacy of the scoring systems, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated. A total of 720 individuals (10.7%) required admission to the ICU. The mortality rate was 1.1% (n = 72). The most predictive scoring system for in-hospital mortality was the adjusted trauma and injury severity score (aTRISS) (AUC = 0.982), followed by trauma and injury severity score (TRISS) (AUC = 0.980), new trauma and injury severity score (NTRISS) (AUC = 0.972), Glasgow coma scale (GCS) (AUC = 0.9546), revised trauma score (RTS) (AUC = 0.944), pre-hospital index (PHI) (AUC = 0.936), injury severity score (ISS) (AUC = 0.901), new injury severity score (NISS) (AUC = 0.900), and abbreviated injury scale (AIS) (AUC = 0.734). Given the predictive performance of the scoring systems for ICU admission, NTRISS had the highest predictive performance (AUC = 0.837), followed by aTRISS (AUC = 0.836), TRISS (AUC = 0.823), ISS (AUC = 0.807), NISS (AUC = 0.805), GCS (AUC = 0.735), RTS (AUC = 0.698), PHI (AUC = 0.662), and AIS (AUC = 0.651). In the present study, we concluded the superiority of the TRISS and its two derived counterparts, aTRISS and NTRISS, compared to other scoring systems, to efficiently discerning individuals who possess a heightened susceptibility to unfavorable consequences. The significance of these findings underscores the necessity of incorporating these metrics into the realm of clinical practice.

Utilizing ultra-early continuous physiologic data to develop automated measures of clinical severity in a traumatic brain injury population

Determination of prognosis in the triage process after traumatic brain injury (TBI) is difficult to achieve. Current severity measures like the Trauma and injury severity score (TRISS) and revised trauma score (RTS) rely on additional information from the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and the Injury Severity Score (ISS) which may be inaccurate or delayed, limiting their usefulness in the rapid triage setting. We hypothesized that machine learning based estimations of GCS and ISS obtained through modeling of continuous vital sign features could be used to rapidly derive an automated RTS and TRISS. We derived variables from electrocardiograms (ECG), photoplethysmography (PPG), and blood pressure using continuous data obtained in the first 15 min of admission to build machine learning models of GCS and ISS (ML-GCS and ML-ISS). We compared the TRISS and RTS using ML-ISS and ML-GCS and its value using the actual ISS and GCS in predicting in-hospital mortality. Models were tested in TBI with systemic injury (head abbreviated injury scale (AIS) ≥ 1), and isolated TBI (head AIS ≥ 1 and other AIS ≤ 1). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was used to evaluate model performance. A total of 21,077 cases (2009–2015) were in the training set. 6057 cases from 2016 to 2017 were used for testing, with 472 (7.8%) severe TBI (GCS 3–8), 223 (3.7%) moderate TBI (GCS 9–12), and 5913 (88.5%) mild TBI (GCS 13–15). In the TBI with systemic injury group, ML-TRISS had similar AUROC (0.963) to TRISS (0.965) in predicting mortality. ML-RTS had AUROC (0.823) and RTS had AUROC 0.928. In the isolated TBI group, ML-TRISS had AUROC 0.977, and TRISS had AUROC 0.983. ML-RTS had AUROC 0.790 and RTS had AUROC 0.957. Estimation of ISS and GCS from machine learning based modeling of vital sign features can be utilized to provide accurate assessments of the RTS and TRISS in a population of TBI patients. Automation of these scores could be utilized to enhance triage and resource allocation during the ultra-early phase of resuscitation.

Evaluation of management of CT scan proved solid organ injury in blunt injury abdomen-a prospective study.

Trauma especially road traffic injury is one of the major health-related issues throughout the world, especially in developing countries like India (Mattox 2022). Solid organ injury is the most common cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with blunt abdominal trauma. The non-operative management (NOM) is being consistently followed for hemodynamically stable patients with respect to solid organ injuries. This study aims to provide an evidence base for management modalities of solid organ injuries in blunt abdominal trauma. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of various treatment modalities for solid organ injury in blunt abdominal trauma. Evaluating the characteristics of blunt abdominal injury with respect to age and gender; distribution, mode of injury, most common organ injured, and severity of injury; effect of delay in getting treatment on the management outcome for patients with solid organ injury; evaluating the various modalities of treatment of CT-proven solid organ injury; incidence of complications in different modes of treatment. All patients aged more than 18years and suffering from CT-proven solid organ injury secondary to blunt abdominal trauma between February 2021 and September 2022 were included in this prospective observational study. Sixty-five patients were enrolled in the study after meeting the inclusion criteria. Details such as age, gender, mechanism of injury, the time between injury to first hospital contact, presenting complaints, organ and grade of injury, Revised Trauma Score (RTS), Trauma Score and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), management, and outcomes were collected using self-designed pro forma and analyzed. Different modalities of treatment were evaluated and patients undergoing operative and non-operative management were compared. Patients in whom non-operative management failed were compared with patients with successful non-operative management. The mean age of patients involved were 36.8years with a male:female ratio of 7.125:1 and the most common age group affected being between 21 and 30years. The most common mode of injury was noted to be road traffic accidents (72.3%). The most common presenting complaints were abdominal pain (64.6%) followed by chest pain (29.2%) and vomiting (13.8%). There was no significant relationship between latent period and type of intervention or failure of non-operative management. FAST positivity rate was noted to be 92.3%. Chronic alcoholism and bronchial asthma were significant predictors for patients undergoing upfront surgery (p = 0.003 and 0.006 respectively). The presence of pelvic and spine injury was statistically significant for predicting mortality in polytrauma patients (p = 0.003). Concurrent adrenal injury was found in 24.6% of patients but was not related to failure of non-operative management or mortality. RTS significantly predicts the multitude of organ involvement (p = 0.015). The liver was the most common organ injured (60%) followed by the spleen (52.3%) and the kidney (20%). The liver and the spleen (9.2%) were noted to be the most common organ combination involved. No specific organ or organ injury combination was noted to predict failure of non-operative management or mortality. But the multitude of organ involvement was statistically significant for predicting patients undergoing upfront surgery (p = 0.011). Out of 65 patients enrolled in the study, 7 patients (10.8%) underwent immediate surgery, and 58 patients (89.2%) underwent non-operative management. Among the 68 chosen for non-operative management, 6 patients (9.2%) failed non-operative management and 52 patients (80%) had success of non-operative management. A significant drop in hemoglobin (83.3%) on day 1 (66.6%) was seen to be the commonest reason for failure of non-operative management. The spleen was noted to be the most commonly involved organ intra-operatively (61.5%) followed by the liver (30.8%). Concordance between pre-operative and intra-operative grading of organ injuries was highest for liver and kidney injuries (100%) and lowest for pancreatic injuries (0%). Requirement of blood transfusion and liver injuries were significant factors for failure of non-operative management (p = 0.012 and 0.045 respectively). The presence of pancreatic leak was significant between the non-operated patients and patients operated upfront (p = 0.003). Mortality was noted to be 10.8% (7 patients) in our study. Solid organ injury in blunt abdominal trauma is an important cause of morbidity and mortality. RTS was noted to be a good predictor for solid organ injury in blunt abdominal trauma. Pancreatic injuries are notorious for being under-staged on CT findings; hence, the need arises for multimodality imaging for suspected pancreatic injuries. Non-operative management is a successful modality of treatment for majority of patients suffering from multiple solid organ injuries in blunt abdominal trauma provided serial close monitoring of patient's clinical signs and hemoglobin is instituted along with the presence of an emergency surgery team.

Performance of trauma scoring systems in predicting mortality in geriatric trauma patients: comparison of the ISS, TRISS, and GTOS based on a systemic review and meta-analysis.

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the performance of the Injury Severity Score (ISS), Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), and the Geriatric Trauma Outcome Score (GTOS) in predicting mortality in geriatric trauma patients. The MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases were searched for studies published from January 2008 to October 2023. Studies assessing the performance of the ISS, TRISS, or GTOS in predicting mortality in geriatric trauma patients (over 60years old) and reporting data for the analysis of the pooled area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve (HSROC) were included. Studies that were not conducted in a group of geriatric patients, did not consider mortality as the outcome variable, or had incomplete data were excluded. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Clinical Prediction Rule Checklist was utilized to assess the risk of bias in included studies. STATA 16.0. was used for the AUROC analysis and HSROC analysis. Nineteen studies involving 118,761 geriatric trauma patients were included. The pooled AUROC of the TRISS (AUC = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.77-0.87) was higher than ISS (AUC = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.71-0.79) and GTOS (AUC = 0.80, 95%CI: 0.77-0.83). The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) calculated from HSROC curves also suggested that the TRISS (DOR = 21.5) had a better performance in predicting mortality in geriatric trauma patients than the ISS (DOR = 6.27) and GTOS (DOR = 4.76). This meta-analysis suggested that the TRISS showed better accuracy and performance in predicting mortality in geriatric trauma patients than the ISS and GTOS.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on trauma mortality patients: A retrospective observational study in an Iranian level 1 trauma center.

The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped the epidemiology of various clinical conditions, including trauma which is closely tied to social policies. This study examines and compares the characteristics of trauma mortality patients, and their initial prognostic trauma scores, in the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. We conducted a retrospective observational study involving patients who passed away at a level 1 trauma center from July 23, 2018, to February 19, 2020 (prepandemic), and from February 20, 2020, to September 22, 2021 (pandemic). A subgroup analysis that matched 12 of the same months of the year in the two periods was also done. Patients who arrived deceased or passed away immediately upon arrival were excluded from data analysis. We collected and analyzed demographic and clinical data, employing the Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS), Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and Trauma and ISS (TRISS) to compare initial prognoses. Our study encompassed 1128 patients, with 529 in the prepandemic group and 599 in the pandemic group. Demographic characteristics showed no significant differences in the number of patients in the two periods. Motor vehicle accidents remained the predominant injury mechanism in both periods. While the mean ISS increased insignificantly (22.80 vs. 22.91, p = 0.902), the mean RTS decreased (6.32 vs. 5.82), and TRISS increased (23.97% vs. 28.93%) during the pandemic (p < 0.05). Hospital length of stay decreased in the pandemic period (15.57 vs. 12.54 days, p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed increased ISS, decreased RTS, and increased TRISS during the pandemic (p < 0.05). In conclusion, while overall demographics and injury mechanisms remained virtually unchanged, trauma patients during the pandemic displayed worse estimated clinical prognoses, particularly in physiological trauma scores. The heightened mortality rate was attributed to poorer clinical conditions of patients.

The role of test results in the emergency department in the evaluation of major torso injury patients

We studied the role of laboratory tests in the emergency department (ED) for the prediction of outcomes in major torso injury patients. We hypothesized that the laboratory test results in the ED could predict worse outcomes and be complement of the TRISS (trauma and injury severity score) which serves a popular prediction model for trauma patients. Patients with major torso trauma who were sent to a level-I trauma center between January 2016 and December 2020 were retrospectively studied. Demographic information, TRISS, and laboratory data (glucose, lactate, base deficit (BD)) were collected and analyzed. The early death (death within 24 hours from the ED arrival) and the long intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) (over seven days) were defined as the primary and secondary outcomes. A prediction model that integrated TRISS and the laboratory test results was created and evaluated by using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve with the area under the curve (AUC). In total, 827 patients were studied. The glucose (255.2 ± 109.9 vs. 192.1 ± 77.0, p &lt; 0.001) and lactate (77.2 ± 43.4 vs. 39.2 ± 26.4, p &lt; 0.001) levels were significantly higher in patients who died early. The performance of glucose, lactate and BD in identifying those major torso trauma patients who would die early demonstrated acceptable discrimination (glucose: AUC = 0.687; lactate: AUC = 0.778; BD: AUC = 0.734). Furthermore, a model that integrated the TRISS and laboratory tests showed calibration of AUC = 0.863. Moreover, the levels of BD and glucose were also independent factors of long ICU LOS. In conclusion, checking lactate, BD and blood glucose is recommended in the evaluation of major torso trauma patients. Biochemical markers are beneficial in predicting worse outcomes for patients with major torso trauma and can complement the TRISS for these patients.

Evaluation of emergency department admissions of mass casualty patients using the revised trauma score, injury severity score, and trauma and injury severity score.

There is a need for studies evaluating prognostic scoring systems in mass trauma patients in conflict regions to predict patient prognosis for emergency surgical prioritization. In this study, we aimed to evaluate scoring systems such as the Revised Trauma Score (RTS), Injury Severity Score (ISS), and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) in trauma patients admitted due to mass trauma in Northern Syria. This study was a retrospective evaluation of patients admitted due to mass trauma to the emergency departments of hospitals in Northern Syria. The diagnostic efficiency of RTS, ISS, and TRISS scoring systems was evaluated in these admissions in the first half of 2021. The most common causes of mass trauma were bomb blast (67.3%), gunshot (28.8%), and 14 (3.9%) patients admitted with other causes. When the odds ratio (OR) was analyzed, a one-unit increase in the RTS score increased the odds of survival by a factor of 6.133, and a one-unit increase in the TRISS score increased the odds of survival by a factor of 1.057. Differently, it was found that each 1-unit increase in ISS decreased the patient's probability of survival by 0.856 units. When RTS, TRISS, and ISS scores were analyzed, the area under the ROC curve was statistically significant for all of them (p<0.001) and all of them had a diagnostic value for mortality with sensitivities of 99.0%, 94.8%, and 91.9%; specificities of 87.8%, 90.5%, and 88.6; AUC of 0.958, 0.975, and 0.958, respectively. The use of trauma scoring systems, especially TRISS, may be useful for prioritizing patients in mass casualty settings in the presence of overcapacity.

A prospective cohort study evaluating the TRISS and TRISS-SpO2 scoring systems for assessing mortality risk in trauma study participants in India.

Globally, trauma cases have significant morbidity and mortality. Hence, various scoring systems have been designed to improve the prognosis in trauma cases. Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) is one of the widely used models to predict mortality; however, it has certain limitation. We have aimed to evaluate the survival prediction of new model TRISS-oxygen saturation (SpO2) and to compare with original TRISS score in trauma study participants. This was a prospective cohort study conducted on 380 trauma study participants admitted to the surgery department from January 20, 2021, to November 28, 2021. The proposed model includes TRISS-SpO2 which replaces pulse SpO2 instead of revised trauma score in the original TRISS score. Probability of survival (Ps) was calculated for both models using coefficients derived from Walker-Duncan regression analysis analyzed from the Major Trauma Outcome Study. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to predict model performance and the accuracy was calculated. The mortality rate in the present study was 30 (7.9%). The predictive accuracy of original TRISS score which calculated Ps based on respiratory rate was 97.11%, and for the proposed model of TRISS score which calculated Ps based on SpO2 was found 97.11%, and thus there is no significant difference in the performance. The new proposed model TRISS-SpO2 showed a good accuracy which is similar to original TRISS score. However, the new tool TRISS-SpO2 might be easier to use for robust performance in the clinical setting.

Performance of severity indices for admission and mortality of trauma patients in the intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundLittle is known about the performance of severity indices for indicating intensive care and predicting mortality in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of trauma patients. This study aimed to compare the performance of severity indices to predict trauma patients’ ICU admission and mortality.MethodsA retrospective cohort study which analyzed the electronic medical records of trauma patients aged ≥ 18 years, treated at a hospital in Brazil, between 2014 and 2017. Physiological [Revised Trauma Score (RTS), New Trauma Score (NTS) and modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (mREMS)], anatomical [Injury Severity Score (ISS) and New Injury Severity Score (NISS)] and mixed indices [Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), New Trauma and Injury Severity Score (NTRISS), Base-deficit Injury Severity Score (BISS) and Base-deficit and New Injury Severity Score (BNISS)] were compared in analyzing the outcomes (ICU admission and mortality) using the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics Curves (AUC–ROC).ResultsFrom the 747 trauma patients analyzed (52.5% female; mean age 51.5 years; 36.1% falls), 106 (14.2%) were admitted to the ICU and 6 (0.8%) died in the unit. The ISS (AUC 0.919) and NISS (AUC 0.916) had better predictive capacity for ICU admission of trauma patients. The NISS (AUC 0.949), TRISS (AUC 0.909), NTRISS (AUC 0.967), BISS (AUC 0.902) and BNISS (AUC 0.976) showed excellent performance in predicting ICU mortality.ConclusionsAnatomical indices showed excellent predictive ability for admission of trauma patients to the ICU. The NISS and the mixed indices had the best performances regarding mortality in the ICU.

Which curve is better? A comparative analysis of trauma scoring systems in a South Asian country

ObjectivesA diverse set of trauma scoring systems are used globally to predict outcomes and benchmark trauma systems. There is a significant potential benefit of using these scores in low and...

Use of the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) as a Predictor of Patient Outcome in Cases of Trauma Presenting in the Trauma and Emergency Department of a Tertiary Care Institute.

In this study, we used the anatomic scoring system Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) to calculate the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the physiological scoring system for the Revised Trauma Score (RTS) on the arrival of patients. Both scores were used to calculate the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) for predicting the patient outcome in a case of trauma. This prospective, cross-sectional, observational study was carried out at the trauma centre of a tertiary care institute and included patients of either sex, age ≥18 years, and ISS ≥15. A total of 2084 cases of trauma over a period of 18 months were assessed, and 96 cases of blunt trauma meeting the inclusion criteria were studied. Patients injured in road traffic accidents constituted the maximum caseload. Out of a sample size of 96 patients with ISS ≥15, 77 died during the treatment and 19 survived. The ISS ranged from 15 to 66, with a mean ± SD score of 27.48 ± 8.79. Non-survivors had a statistically higher significant ISS than survivors (p<0.001). The RTS ranged from <1 to 7.84, with a mean ± SD score of 4.52 ± 2.08. Non-survivors had low RTS (RTS <5, n=52) compared to survivors, and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.001). The mean ± SD TRISS (Ps) score was 0.69 ± 2.288. In the non-survivor (NS) group, 15 patients had TRISS (Ps) between 0.26-0.50, followed by 0.51-0.75 (n=18), 0.76-0.90 (n=12), and 0.90-0.95 (n=11). While 16 survivors had TRISS (Ps) between 0.96 and 1, a statistically significant association was found between TRISS and patient outcome (p-value <0.001). On the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the sensitivity of TRISS (94.7%) and RTS was found to be comparable (94.7%), whereas ISS was less sensitive (36.8%) in predicting the patient outcome. RTS (79.2%) and TRISS (76.6%) scores were more specific than ISS (5.2%) for outcome analysis. The TRISS score is useful in the management of trauma patients as it can satisfactorily predict mortality in a case of trauma. The trauma scores are of immense help in determining the nature of injury in medicolegal cases.

The Addition of the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index to the Prognostic Scoring Systems Did Not Improve Mortality Prediction in Trauma Patients in the Intensive Care Unit.

Malnutrition is prevalent among critically ill patients and has been associated with a poor prognosis. This study sought to determine whether the addition of a nutritional indicator to the various variables of prognostic scoring models can improve the prediction of mortality among trauma patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). This study's cohort included 1,126 trauma patients hospitalized in the ICU between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021. Two nutritional indicators, the prognostic nutrition index (PNI), a calculation based on the serum albumin concentration and peripheral blood lymphocyte count, and the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI), a calculation based on the serum albumin concentration and the ratio of current body weight to ideal body weight, were examined for their association with the mortality outcome. The significant nutritional indicator was served as an additional variable in prognostic scoring models of the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II), and the mortality prediction models (MPM II) at admission, 24, 48, and 72 h in the mortality outcome prediction. The predictive performance was determined by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that GNRI (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96-0.99; p=0.007), but not PNI (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.02; p=0.518), was independent risk factor for mortality. However, none of these predictive scoring models showed a significant improvement in prediction when the GNRI variable is incorporated. The addition of GNRI as a variable to the prognostic scoring models did not significantly enhance the performance of the predictors.

Predicting the Future in Trauma: Trauma and Injury Severity Score Loses Accuracy and Validity for Late Deaths After Injury.

The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) is widely used to predict mortality in trauma patients, but its performance metrics have not been analyzed for early vs later deaths. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the impact of time to death on the accuracy of TRISS. Patients from 2013 to 2018 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database were included. We compared predicted survival by TRISS using the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) and calibration curves between different cut-off times and subgroups. We further compared early (≤72hr) and late (>72hr) deaths based on mechanisms and severity. Among the 1,180,745 patients, the total mortality rate was 6.4%, with 59% early deaths and 41% late deaths. The AUC of TRISS for all patients was .919 (95% CI: .918-.921) for ≤72hr survival and .845 (95% CI: .843-.848) for >72hr survival. Significant discrepancies in AUCs between the early and late death groups existed in all cohorts based on blunt/penetrating mechanisms and severity. TRISS predicted well in early survival of penetrating injury but was less reliable in late survival of penetrating injury and all blunt injury. TRISS tended to underestimate survival, particularly for patients with lower probability of survival, with increased discrepancies seen for predicting late deaths. The predictive ability of TRISS varies significantly based on the timing of deaths and key injury factors. TRISS may be best utilized in predicting early survival in penetrating injury, but its reliability and accuracy diminish when predicting late deaths for all kinds of injury.

Comparison of National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Surgical Risk Calculator and Trauma and Injury Severity Score Risk Assessment Tools in Predicting Outcomes in High-Risk Operative Trauma Patients.

The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) uses anatomic/physiologic variables to predict outcomes. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Surgical Risk Calculator (NSQIP-SRC) includes functional status and comorbidities. It is unclear which of these tools is superior for high-risk trauma patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) class IV or V). This study compares risk prediction of TRISS and NSQIP-SRC for mortality, length of stay (LOS), and complications for high-risk operative trauma patients. This is a prospective study of high-risk (ASA-PS IV or V) trauma patients (≥18years-old) undergoing surgery at 4 trauma centers. We compared TRISS vs NSQIP-SRC vs NSQIP-SRC + TRISS for ability to predict mortality, LOS, and complications using linear, logistic, and negative binomial regression. Of 284 patients, 48 (16.9%) died. The median LOS was 16days and number of complications was 1. TRISS + NSQIP-SRC best predicted mortality (AUROC: .877 vs .723 vs .843, P = .0018) and number of complications (pseudo-R2/median error (ME) 5.26%/1.15 vs 3.39%/1.33 vs 2.07%/1.41, P < .001) compared to NSQIP-SRC or TRISS, but there was no difference between TRISS + NSQIP-SRC and NSQIP-SRC with LOS prediction (P = .43). For high-risk operative trauma patients, TRISS + NSQIP-SRC performed better at predicting mortality and number of complications compared to NSQIP-SRC or TRISS alone but similar to NSQIP-SRC alone for LOS. Thus, future risk prediction and comparisons across trauma centers for high-risk operative trauma patients should include a combination of anatomic/physiologic data, comorbidities, and functional status.

Management strategy for open pelvic fractures: A 11-year single-centre, retrospective observational study

Introduction: Open pelvic fractures are commonly associated with life-threatening, uncontrollable haemorrhages. Although management methods for pelvic injury-associated haemorrhage have been established, the early mortality rate associated with open pelvic fractures remains high. This study aimed to identify predictors of mortality and effective treatment methods for open pelvic fractures. Methods: We defined open pelvic fractures as pelvic fractures with an open wound directly connected to the adjacent soft tissue, genitals, perineum, or anorectal structures, resulting in soft tissue injuries. This study was performed on trauma patients (age ≥15 years) injured by a blunt mechanism between 2011 and 2021 at a single trauma centre. We collected and analysed the data on the Injury Severity Score (ISS), the Revised Trauma Score (RTS), the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay, transfusion, preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP), resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA), therapeutic angio-embolisation, laparotomy, faecal diversion, and mortality. ResultsForty-seven patients with blunt open pelvic fractures were included. The median age was 45 years (interquartile range, 27–57 years) and median ISS was 34 (24–43). The most frequently performed treatment methods were laparotomy (53%) and pelvic binder (53%), followed by faecal diversion (40%) and PPP (38%). PPP was the only method performed at a higher rate in the survival group for haemorrhagic control (41% vs. 30%). Haemorrhagic mortality was present in one case that received PPP. The overall mortality was 21%. In the univariate logistic regression analysis, initial systolic blood pressure (SBP), TRISS, RTS, packed red blood cell transfusion for the first 24 h, and base excess showed statistical significance (p<0.05). In the multivariate logistic regression model, initial SBP was identified as an independent risk factor for mortality (odds ratio, 0.943; 95% confidence interval, 0.907–0.980; p = 0.003). ConclusionA low initial SPB may be an independent predictor of mortality in patients with open pelvic fractures. Our findings suggest that PPP might be a feasible method to decrease haemorrhagic mortality from open pelvic fractures, especially for haemodynamically unstable patients with low initial SBP. Further studies are required to validate these clinical findings.

Investigating RTS, TRISS, GCS, and FOUR as measures for predicting the mortality in trauma patients: A prospective study

Background: Some measures have been proposed for the prediction of death after trauma; however, there is a lack of studies on this issue in trauma patients. Therefore, this study was conducted to compare the validity of four scales in predicting the death of trauma patients, and we hypothesized that the accuracies of various scales are different. Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was conducted prospectively on 600 trauma patients admitted at the emergency ward of Imam Khomeini Hospital in Ilam, Ilam province, west of Iran. The subjects were selected by convenience sampling. Data were collected using the checklists developed for trauma patients, including the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) score, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), and then the data were analyzed using the chi-square test and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: Among the 600 patients, most of them were male (76.8%), with a mean and standard deviation of the age of 31.16 ± 18.06 years, and road traffic accident was the most common cause of trauma (73%). The FOUR scale was the most valid in predicting the mortality of trauma patients, and its sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy were equal to 93.2, 94.5, 64.7, 99.2, and 94.3%, respectively. The AUC was equal to 0.938 for the FOUR scale, followed by the RTS (0.787). Conclusion: Results of the study about the predictive value of the scales for mortality prediction of trauma patients showed that the FOUR scale had the highest accuracy compared to other scales. Thus, for applying this scale in trauma and emergency centers, besides our results, further studies are needed to support the study findings.

Comparison of Preventable Trauma Death Rates in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury Before and After the Establishment of Regional Trauma Center: A Single Center Experience.

To compare preventable trauma death rates (PTDRs) in patients with traumatic brain injury before and after the establishment of a regional trauma center (RTC) at a single center. Our institution established an RTC in 2014. A total of 709 patients were enrolled from January 2011 to December 2013 (before RTC) and 672 from January 2019 to December 2021 (after RTC). The revised trauma score, injury severity score, and trauma and injury severity score (TRISS) were evaluated. Definitive preventable (DP), possibly preventable (PP), and non-preventable deaths were defined as TRISS >0.5, TRISS 0.25-0.5, and TRISS <0.25, respectively. PTDR was the proportion of deaths from DP+PP out of all deaths, and the preventable major trauma death rate (PMTDR) was the proportion of deaths from DP+PP out of all DP+PP. The overall mortality rates before and after the establishment of RTC were 20.3 and 13.1%, respectively. PTDR was lower after the establishment of RTC than before (90.3% vs. 79.5%). The PMTDR was also lower after the establishment of RTC than before (18.8% vs. 9.7%). The ratio of direct hospital visits was higher in patients before the establishment of RTC than in those after (74.9% vs. 61.3%, p<0.001). Establishing the RTC reduced PTDRs. Additional studies on factors associated with PTDR reduction are required.