Cargando…

An injury mortality prediction based on the anatomic injury scale

To determine whether the injury mortality prediction (IMP) statistically outperforms the trauma mortality prediction model (TMPM) as a predictor of mortality. The TMPM is currently the best trauma score method, which is based on the anatomic injury. Its ability of mortality prediction is superior to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Muding, Wu, Dan, Qiu, Wusi, Wang, Weimi, Zeng, Yunji, Shen, Yi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5585518/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28858124
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000007945
_version_ 1783261644459081728
author Wang, Muding
Wu, Dan
Qiu, Wusi
Wang, Weimi
Zeng, Yunji
Shen, Yi
author_facet Wang, Muding
Wu, Dan
Qiu, Wusi
Wang, Weimi
Zeng, Yunji
Shen, Yi
author_sort Wang, Muding
collection PubMed
description To determine whether the injury mortality prediction (IMP) statistically outperforms the trauma mortality prediction model (TMPM) as a predictor of mortality. The TMPM is currently the best trauma score method, which is based on the anatomic injury. Its ability of mortality prediction is superior to the injury severity score (ISS) and to the new injury severity score (NISS). However, despite its statistical significance, the predictive power of TMPM needs to be further improved. Retrospective cohort study is based on the data of 1,148,359 injured patients in the National Trauma Data Bank hospitalized from 2010 to 2011. Sixty percent of the data was used to derive an empiric measure of severity of different Abbreviated Injury Scale predot codes by taking the weighted average death probabilities of trauma patients. Twenty percent of the data was used to create computing method of the IMP model. The remaining 20% of the data was used to evaluate the statistical performance of IMP and then be compared with the TMPM and the single worst injury by examining area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), the Hosmer–Lemeshow (HL) statistic, and the Akaike information criterion. IMP exhibits significantly both better discrimination (ROC-IMP, 0.903 [0.899–0.907] and ROC-TMPM, 0.890 [0.886–0.895]) and calibration (HL-IMP, 9.9 [4.4–14.7] and HL-TMPM, 197 [143–248]) compared with TMPM. All models show slight changes after the extension of age, gender, and mechanism of injury, but the extended IMP still dominated TMPM in every performance. The IMP has slight improvement in discrimination and calibration compared with the TMPM and can accurately predict mortality. Therefore, we consider it as a new feasible scoring method in trauma research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5585518
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55855182017-09-11 An injury mortality prediction based on the anatomic injury scale Wang, Muding Wu, Dan Qiu, Wusi Wang, Weimi Zeng, Yunji Shen, Yi Medicine (Baltimore) 7100 To determine whether the injury mortality prediction (IMP) statistically outperforms the trauma mortality prediction model (TMPM) as a predictor of mortality. The TMPM is currently the best trauma score method, which is based on the anatomic injury. Its ability of mortality prediction is superior to the injury severity score (ISS) and to the new injury severity score (NISS). However, despite its statistical significance, the predictive power of TMPM needs to be further improved. Retrospective cohort study is based on the data of 1,148,359 injured patients in the National Trauma Data Bank hospitalized from 2010 to 2011. Sixty percent of the data was used to derive an empiric measure of severity of different Abbreviated Injury Scale predot codes by taking the weighted average death probabilities of trauma patients. Twenty percent of the data was used to create computing method of the IMP model. The remaining 20% of the data was used to evaluate the statistical performance of IMP and then be compared with the TMPM and the single worst injury by examining area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), the Hosmer–Lemeshow (HL) statistic, and the Akaike information criterion. IMP exhibits significantly both better discrimination (ROC-IMP, 0.903 [0.899–0.907] and ROC-TMPM, 0.890 [0.886–0.895]) and calibration (HL-IMP, 9.9 [4.4–14.7] and HL-TMPM, 197 [143–248]) compared with TMPM. All models show slight changes after the extension of age, gender, and mechanism of injury, but the extended IMP still dominated TMPM in every performance. The IMP has slight improvement in discrimination and calibration compared with the TMPM and can accurately predict mortality. Therefore, we consider it as a new feasible scoring method in trauma research. Wolters Kluwer Health 2017-09-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5585518/ /pubmed/28858124 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000007945 Text en Copyright © 2017 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
spellingShingle 7100
Wang, Muding
Wu, Dan
Qiu, Wusi
Wang, Weimi
Zeng, Yunji
Shen, Yi
An injury mortality prediction based on the anatomic injury scale
title An injury mortality prediction based on the anatomic injury scale
title_full An injury mortality prediction based on the anatomic injury scale
title_fullStr An injury mortality prediction based on the anatomic injury scale
title_full_unstemmed An injury mortality prediction based on the anatomic injury scale
title_short An injury mortality prediction based on the anatomic injury scale
title_sort injury mortality prediction based on the anatomic injury scale
topic 7100
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5585518/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28858124
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000007945
work_keys_str_mv AT wangmuding aninjurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT wudan aninjurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT qiuwusi aninjurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT wangweimi aninjurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT zengyunji aninjurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT shenyi aninjurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT wangmuding injurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT wudan injurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT qiuwusi injurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT wangweimi injurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT zengyunji injurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale
AT shenyi injurymortalitypredictionbasedontheanatomicinjuryscale