2010
DOI: 10.1177/147323001003800437
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improved Prediction from Revised Injury Severity Classification (RISC) over Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) in an Independent Evaluation of Major Trauma Patients

Abstract: The usefulness of the Revised Injury Severity Classification (RISC) analysis was compared with that of the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) for evaluating the quality of treatment of severely injured patients at the General Hospital Celje, Slovenia. Over a period of 2 years, data from a cohort of 155 patients treated at the General Hospital Celje were included in the Traumaregister Deutsche Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie. The structure of the patient group was compared with that in the registry, and … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
2
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Selain itu kesalahan dari perhitungan RTS atau ISS akan membuat nilai TRISS menjadi salah. 11 Dengan keterbatasan ini kami berpendapat bahwa TRISS kurang cocok diterapkan di fase prahospital maupun triage. 12…”
Section: Trissunclassified
“…Selain itu kesalahan dari perhitungan RTS atau ISS akan membuat nilai TRISS menjadi salah. 11 Dengan keterbatasan ini kami berpendapat bahwa TRISS kurang cocok diterapkan di fase prahospital maupun triage. 12…”
Section: Trissunclassified
“…The Trauma Score and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) from 1987 is the most common [5][6][7]. The Revised Injury Severity Classification (RISC) score, introduced in 2009 and based on data from the German Trauma Registry, has, when compared to TRISS, demonstrated an improved predictive performance, however [8,9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reporting of these statistics is important because the M statistic for non-US populations may be below the cutoff for non-standardized TRISS analyses, thereby rendering comparisons invalid [12]. The RISC, while a more contemporary and potentially more accurate system for comparing outcomes [13], did not reveal a statistically significant survival benefit for HEMS compared to GEMS.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%