A total of 8,988 trauma patients were included, of whom 854 died (9.5%). The TRISS MTOS displayed excellent discrimination with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.912 (95% CI 0.902-0.923) and comparable with TRISS NTDB (AUC = 0.908, 95% CI 0.897-0.919, p = .1195). Calibration of both models was poor (Hosmer-Lemeshow test p < .001), tending to underestimate the probability of mortality across almost all risk groups. The TRISS GrTD resulted in statistically significant improvement in discrimination (AUC = 0.927, 95% CI 0.918-0.936, p < .0001) and acceptable calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow test p = .113). CONCLUSION:In this cohort of Greek trauma patients, the performance of the original TRISS was suboptimal, and there was no evidence that it has benefited from its latest revision. By contrast, a strong case exists for supporting a locally recalibrated version to render the TRISS applicable for mortality prediction and performance benchmarking.

No abstract