Cargando…
ISS alone, is not sufficient to correctly assign patients post hoc to trauma team requirement
PURPOSE: An injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 16 alone, is commonly used post hoc to define the correct activation of a trauma team. However, abnormal vital functions and the requirement of life-saving procedures may also have a role in defining trauma team requirement post hoc. The aim of this study wa...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8825400/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32556366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-020-01410-4 |
_version_ | 1784647200783990784 |
---|---|
author | Waydhas, Christian Bieler, Dan Hamsen, Uwe Baacke, Markus Lefering, Rolf |
author_facet | Waydhas, Christian Bieler, Dan Hamsen, Uwe Baacke, Markus Lefering, Rolf |
author_sort | Waydhas, Christian |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: An injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 16 alone, is commonly used post hoc to define the correct activation of a trauma team. However, abnormal vital functions and the requirement of life-saving procedures may also have a role in defining trauma team requirement post hoc. The aim of this study was to describe their prevalence and mortality in severely injured patients and to estimate their potential additional value in the definition of trauma team requirement as compared to the definition based on ISS alone. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a trauma registry including patients with trauma team activation from the years 2009 until 2015, who were 16 years of age or older and were brought to the trauma center directly from the scene. Patients were divided into a group with an ISS ≥ 16 vs. ISS < 16. For analysis a predefined list of abnormal vital functions and life-saving interventions was used. RESULTS: 58,723 patients were included in the study (N = 32,653 with ISS ≥ 16; N = 26,070 with ISS < 16). From the total number of patients that required life-saving procedures or presented with abnormal vital functions 29.1% were found in the ISS < 16 group. From the ISS < 16 group, 36.7% of patients required life-saving procedures or presented with abnormal vital signs. The mortality of those was 8.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Defining the true requirement of trauma team activation post hoc by using ISS ≥ 16 alone does miss a considerable number of subjects who require life-saving interventions or present with abnormal vital functions. Therefore, life-saving interventions and abnormal vital functions should be included in the definitions for trauma team requirement. Further studies have to evaluate, which life-saving procedures and abnormal vital functions are most relevant. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8825400 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88254002022-02-23 ISS alone, is not sufficient to correctly assign patients post hoc to trauma team requirement Waydhas, Christian Bieler, Dan Hamsen, Uwe Baacke, Markus Lefering, Rolf Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Original Article PURPOSE: An injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 16 alone, is commonly used post hoc to define the correct activation of a trauma team. However, abnormal vital functions and the requirement of life-saving procedures may also have a role in defining trauma team requirement post hoc. The aim of this study was to describe their prevalence and mortality in severely injured patients and to estimate their potential additional value in the definition of trauma team requirement as compared to the definition based on ISS alone. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a trauma registry including patients with trauma team activation from the years 2009 until 2015, who were 16 years of age or older and were brought to the trauma center directly from the scene. Patients were divided into a group with an ISS ≥ 16 vs. ISS < 16. For analysis a predefined list of abnormal vital functions and life-saving interventions was used. RESULTS: 58,723 patients were included in the study (N = 32,653 with ISS ≥ 16; N = 26,070 with ISS < 16). From the total number of patients that required life-saving procedures or presented with abnormal vital functions 29.1% were found in the ISS < 16 group. From the ISS < 16 group, 36.7% of patients required life-saving procedures or presented with abnormal vital signs. The mortality of those was 8.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Defining the true requirement of trauma team activation post hoc by using ISS ≥ 16 alone does miss a considerable number of subjects who require life-saving interventions or present with abnormal vital functions. Therefore, life-saving interventions and abnormal vital functions should be included in the definitions for trauma team requirement. Further studies have to evaluate, which life-saving procedures and abnormal vital functions are most relevant. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-06-16 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8825400/ /pubmed/32556366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-020-01410-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Waydhas, Christian Bieler, Dan Hamsen, Uwe Baacke, Markus Lefering, Rolf ISS alone, is not sufficient to correctly assign patients post hoc to trauma team requirement |
title | ISS alone, is not sufficient to correctly assign patients post hoc to trauma team requirement |
title_full | ISS alone, is not sufficient to correctly assign patients post hoc to trauma team requirement |
title_fullStr | ISS alone, is not sufficient to correctly assign patients post hoc to trauma team requirement |
title_full_unstemmed | ISS alone, is not sufficient to correctly assign patients post hoc to trauma team requirement |
title_short | ISS alone, is not sufficient to correctly assign patients post hoc to trauma team requirement |
title_sort | iss alone, is not sufficient to correctly assign patients post hoc to trauma team requirement |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8825400/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32556366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-020-01410-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT waydhaschristian issaloneisnotsufficienttocorrectlyassignpatientsposthoctotraumateamrequirement AT bielerdan issaloneisnotsufficienttocorrectlyassignpatientsposthoctotraumateamrequirement AT hamsenuwe issaloneisnotsufficienttocorrectlyassignpatientsposthoctotraumateamrequirement AT baackemarkus issaloneisnotsufficienttocorrectlyassignpatientsposthoctotraumateamrequirement AT leferingrolf issaloneisnotsufficienttocorrectlyassignpatientsposthoctotraumateamrequirement AT issaloneisnotsufficienttocorrectlyassignpatientsposthoctotraumateamrequirement |