Cargando…

Performance validation of different trauma scoring systems among polytrauma patients having predominantly blunt abdominal trauma

INTRODUCTION: Blunt abdominal trauma substantially contributes to mortality and morbidity in patients with polytrauma. Appropriate clinical assessment is important in setups lacking facilities of advanced diagnostics (abdominal computed tomography scans and ultrasonography) to decide if the patients...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yadav, Moorat Singh, Nagar, Manoj, Joshi, Ankur, Gupta, Achal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7491821/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32984140
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_377_20
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Blunt abdominal trauma substantially contributes to mortality and morbidity in patients with polytrauma. Appropriate clinical assessment is important in setups lacking facilities of advanced diagnostics (abdominal computed tomography scans and ultrasonography) to decide if the patients’ needs exceed the facilities available. This study aimed to assess the utility of the commonly used trauma scores in predicting the outcome (favorable or unfavorable) in patients with predominantly blunt abdominal trauma. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this prospective observational study of 12-month duration, we calculated three scores (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS], Revised Trauma Score [RTS], and Injury Severity Score [ISS]) in patients brought to emergency department and fulfilling the inclusion criteria. These patients were categorized into two categories (favorable and unfavorable) depending on their treatment outcome. The difference in the mean scores for both outcomes in each score was calculated and further inferences were obtained by using the unpaired t test. A receiver-operating characteristic curve for each score was drawn to understand the trade-off between sensitivity and specificity at each cutoff value and for determining area under curve (AUC) for all three scores. RESULT: A total of 103 patients were recruited in the study (88 men and 15 women) with the mean age of 31.03 (±13.40) years and 34.47 (±18.04) years, respectively. The difference in the scores was maximum for ISS and minimal for RTS. The visual impression, as well as AUC values, shows that ISS performed well to discriminate between the favorable and unfavorable outcomes in each cutoff values (AUC –0.806, lower bound 0.678 to upper bound 0.934) compared to GCS and RTS scores. The Youden's J statistic for ISS value of 42 was maximum (0.298) and corresponding sensitivity and specificity were 0.651 and 0.647. CONCLUSION: ISS is superior as compared to GCS and RTS in predicting outcome in polytrauma patients with a blunt abdominal injury. ISS value of <42 predicts a favorable outcome.