Correlating injury severity scores and major trauma volume using a state-wide in-patient administrative dataset linked to trauma registry data—A retrospective analysis from New South Wales Australia

Dinh, Michael; Singh, Hardeep; Sarrami, Pooria; Lévesque, Jean‐Frédéric

doi:10.1016/j.injury.2019.09.022

Cited by 9 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, other injury severity classification systems which use International Classification of Disease (ICD)‐coded diagnostic information have been developed and may be considered as an alternative 19–21 . Tools that use direct conversion between ICD‐10 and AIS have also been developed, 22,23 although their utility is under review 24–26 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, other injury severity classification systems which use International Classification of Disease (ICD)-coded diagnostic information have been developed and may be considered as an alternative. [19][20][21] Tools that use direct conversion between ICD-10 and AIS have also been developed, 22,23 although their utility is under review. [24][25][26] Two of the proposed fields; triage category (as recorded using the Australasian Triage Scale) and the total cost of inpatient treatment are not currently active in the BNTMDS.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development of a standardized minimum dataset for including low‐severity trauma patients in trauma registry collections in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand

Christey

Warren

Palmer

et al. 2023

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Trauma continues to place a burden on individuals, communities and health care systems around the world. To help reduce this burden and improve care, trauma registries in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand collect standardized data on patients admitted with Injury Severity Scores greater than 12. There is currently no agreed minimum data set for trauma patients with Injury Severity Score less than 13, representing an opportunity to provide more data for quality improvement and injury prevention. Methods A binational, expert, advisory group assessed the value of potential fields for a minimum dataset for low severity trauma. Existing trauma registries in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand were assessed to ensure compatibility. Results Thirty‐five data fields met criteria for inclusion in the low‐severity minimum dataset. The fields comprised a subset of the Australia New Zealand Major Trauma Registry and were included in existing low‐severity registries. Conclusion A minimum data set for low severity has been defined for use in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand. In addition to high severity trauma data this will provide a standard for data collection that will contribute to quality improvement and injury prevention.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%