Background
To date, multiple scoring systems have been utilised in predicting outcomes in burn patients. The aim of this study is to determine the accuracy of three established scoring systems used for burn patients admitted to the intensive care unit and to determine the risk factors associated with poor outcomes.
Methods
A total of 211 patients who were admitted to the ICBU in a tertiary care centre in Kuwait from January 2017 to December 2019 were analysed retrospectively. Data were collected using patient medical records. The FLAMES, BOBI and revised Baux scores were calculated, and the survivor and non-survivor scores of patients were analysed to determine the sensitivity, specificity and Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics (AUROC) of the different scoring modalities.
Results
The majority of the analysed population were male patients (165/211) and the most common mechanism of burns was flame burns (166/211). Most of the patients admitted to the ICBU survived (188/211). Female gender was associated with a higher mortality rate, whilst inhalational injury and co-morbidities were not associated with a higher mortality rate. The revised Baux score had a sensitivity value of 96% and 90% specificity. The BOBI score had a sensitivity of 91% and 76% specificity. The FLAMES score had a sensitivity of 96% and the highest specificity of 99%. All 3 scores had AUC values exceeding 90%.
Conclusion
Statistically, FLAMES score had the highest accuracy of predicting outcomes in burn patients, however all three scores demonstrated acceptable predictive rates when it comes to practical application, permitting the use of either one of the studied scores with satisfactory prognostic outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.