Trauma Score Systems

Bouillon, Bertil; Lefering, Rolf; Vorweg, M.; Tiling, Th.; Neugebauer, Edmund; Troidl, H.

doi:10.1097/00005373-199704000-00012

Cited by 85 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the past 25 years, many scores have been proposed to asses trauma patient's status, describe injuries, and finally, to predict outcome [1]. More than 50 scoring systems have been published for the classification of trauma patients in the emergency room and intensive care settings [5][6][7]. The most frequently used trauma scores are AIS, RTS, TRISS, and ISS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The prognostic importance of trauma scoring systems in pediatric patients

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The prognostic importance of trauma scoring systems in pediatric patients

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, critical quality management including objective measurable parameters such as hospital costs per inpatient day, length of stay at the intensive care unit (ICU), or mortality rate has to be based on a clearly specified patient population. As a result of missed standardization, data in regard to mortality rate of multiple injured patients range from 9 to 48% in the previous literature [20–23]. In order to demonstrate that polytrauma definition and case number are closely connected we exemplarily focused on the annual report of the German Trauma Register DGU® [24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does the applied polytrauma definition notably influence outcome and patient population? – a retrospective analysis

Frenzel

Krenn

Heinz

et al. 2017

Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAlthough the term “polytrauma” has been in use for decades, no generally accepted definition exists. The aim of this study was to demonstrate that different polytrauma definitions applied to a specific patient population result in diverse subgroups of individuals, who in turn present a varying outcome.MethodsAll patients (≥18 years) treated at our level I trauma center within a time period of three years were classified according to 11 selected polytrauma definitions and included in our study, if they were rated “polytraumatized” by at least one of these definitions. All patients, who met the criteria of a certain definition, were combined to the relevant definition-positive group, thus resulting in 11 patient subgroups. Their demographic data (number of patients, mean patient age, mean Injury Severity Score value, median number of ventilator days, median length of stay at the intensive care unit and at the hospital, mortality rate and odds ratio) were statistically compared.ResultsThree hundred seventy-five patients (73% male) with a mean age of 47 years met the inclusion criteria and were allocated to the relevant subgroups; their patient number varied from 55 to 346 and their mean Injury Severity Score value ranged from 4 to 75. Not surprisingly, all examined parameters were subject to variations. Whereas most definition-positive groups showed a mortality rate of about 21% to 30%, 18% of the individuals, who met the criteria according to Blacker, and 40% of the polytrauma victims according to Schalamon died. The Pape 1-, Schalamon-, and Berlin-positive groups presented a significant odds ratio with regard to mortality that considerably exceeded 1.DiscussionA polytrauma definition can only be a reliable tool in classifying trauma victims if it provides a significant odds ratio with regard to mortality that considerably exceeds 1 and if it succeeds in capturing patients with multiple severe injuries and a higher mortality rate without reducing the number of polytraumatized patients to a not representatively small number.ConclusionsSolely the Berlin definition resulted in a patient number reflecting clinical reality, thus enabling a transparent evaluation of treatment results provided by different institutions and allowing objective comparison of published studies.

show abstract

“…1) is the most widely used anatomical scoring system in the world 23 . It was first introduced in 1974 as a method of comparing outcomes of patients with multiple injuries 12 , 35 . Like the AIS, the ISS is not a quick score to calculate, because each injury must be coded by the AIS system.…”

Section: Trauma Systems Classificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trauma scoring systems explained

1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To list, describe and classify the extant trauma scoring systems found in the English language literature from the vantage of utility to emergency medicine. Each system is illustrated by a table and a hypothetical case study. Data Sources: Medline citations provided the data. The systems are classified as physiological, anatomical and combined trauma scoring systems. Results: We reviewed the Glasgow Coma Scale, the Paediatric Glasgow Coma Scale, the Trauma Score and Revised Trauma Score, the Circulation, Respiration, Abdominal/Thoracic, Motor and Speech Scale, the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation System, Abbreviated Injury Scale, the Injury Severity Score, the Anatomical Profile, A Severity Characterization of Trauma, Revised Trauma Score and Injury Severity Score and its revisions, the Paediatric Trauma Score and the Drug‐Rock Injury Severity Score. Conclusions: This compendium should help emergency physicians become familiar with trauma scoring systems which evaluate the extent and severity of injuries, facilitate inter‐institutional comparisons and facilitate trauma research.

show abstract

Trauma Score Systems

Abstract: We conclude that the standard trauma score systems are valid tools for patient classification and support TRISSRTS as the international reference score system for the assessment of injury severity. This validation will allow comparisons between different trauma care systems.

Cited by 85 publications

References 11 publications

The prognostic importance of trauma scoring systems in pediatric patients

The prognostic importance of trauma scoring systems in pediatric patients

Does the applied polytrauma definition notably influence outcome and patient population? – a retrospective analysis

Trauma scoring systems explained

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About