• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• 제37권2호
• /
• pp.114-123
• /
• 2024

Purpose: Appropriate scoring systems can help classify and treat polytrauma patients. This study aimed to validate chest trauma scoring systems in polytrauma patients. Methods: Data from 1,038 polytrauma patients were analyzed. The primary outcomes were one or more complications: pneumonia, chest complications requiring surgery, and mortality. The Thoracic Trauma Severity Score (TTSS), Chest Trauma Score, Rib Fracture Score, and RibScore were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis in patients with or without head trauma. Results: In total, 1,038 patients were divided into two groups: those with complications (822 patients, 79.2%) and those with no complications (216 patients, 20.8%). Sex and body mass index did not significantly differ between the groups. However, age was higher in the complications group (64.1±17.5 years vs. 54.9±17.6 years, P<0.001). The proportion of head trauma patients was higher (58.3% vs. 24.6%, P<0.001) and the Glasgow Coma Scale score was worse (median [interquartile range], 12 [6.5-15] vs. 15 [14-15]; P<0.001) in the complications group. The number of rib fractures, the degree of rib fracture displacement, and the severity of pulmonary contusions were also higher in the complications group. In the area under the ROC curve analysis, the TTSS showed the highest predictive value for the entire group (0.731), head trauma group (0.715), and no head trauma group (0.730), while RibScore had the poorest performance (0.643, 0.622, and 0.622, respectively) Conclusions: Early injury severity detection and grading are crucial for patients with blunt chest trauma. The chest trauma scoring systems introduced to date, including the TTSS, are not acceptable for clinical use, especially in polytrauma patients with traumatic brain injury. Therefore, further revisions and analyses of chest trauma scoring systems are recommended.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• 제19권1호
• /
• pp.35-40
• /
• 2006

Purpose: Injuries are the third leading cause of death in Korea. Isolated chest injury is not uncommon and shows high mortality and morbidity. Several scoring systems are used for triage and stratification for trauma patients, but no standard system is accepted. We aimed to analyze the accuracy of identification of isolated chest injury by using several scoring systems. Methods: We reviewed a total of 75 patients admitted with isolated chest injury between January 2005 and October 2005. Medical records were reviewed by using the Injury Severity Score (ISS), the Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS). The scoring systems were compared by using statistics methods. Results: The overall predictive accuracy of the TRISS was 12.5%, 12.0% greater than those of the RTS and the ISS. By using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve, the TRISS showed an excellent discriminative power (AUROC 0.931) compared to the ISS (AUROC 0.926) and the RTS (AUROC 0.872). Conclusion: Compared with the RTS and the ISS, the TRISS is an easily applied tool with excellent prognostic abilities for isolated chest trauma patients. However, the TRISS, the ISS, and the RTS showed high specificity and low sensitivity, so another scoring system is required for triage and stratification of isolated chest injury patients.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• 제47권6호
• /
• pp.523-528
• /
• 2014

Background: Numerous statistical models have been developed to accurately predict outcomes in multiple trauma patients. However, such trauma scoring systems reflect the patient's physiological condition, which can only be determined to a limited extent, and are difficult to use when performing a rapid initial assessment. We studied the predictive ability of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) score compared to other scoring systems. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 229 patients with multiple trauma combined with chest injury from January 2006 to June 2011. A SIRS score was calculated for patients based on their presentation to the emergency room. The patients were divided into two groups: those with an SIRS score of two points or above and those with an SIRS score of one or zero. Then, the outcomes between the two groups were compared. Furthermore, the ability of the SIRS score and other injury severity scoring systems to predict mortality was compared. Results: Hospital death occurred in 12 patients (5.2%). There were no significant differences in the general characteristics of patients, but the trauma severity scores were significantly different between the two groups. The SIRS scores, number of complications, and mortality rate were significantly higher in those with a SIRS score of two or above (p<0.001). In the multivariant analysis, the SIRS score was the only independent factor related to mortality. Conclusion: The SIRS score is easily calculated on admission and may accurately predict mortality in patients with multiple traumas.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• 제34권1호
• /
• pp.3-12
• /
• 2021

Purpose: To evaluate the severity of trauma, many scoring systems and predictive models have been presented. The quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) is a simple scoring system based on vital signs, and we expect it to be easier to apply to trauma patients than other trauma assessment tools. Methods: This study was a cross-sectional study of trauma patients who visited the emergency department of Jeju National University Hospital. We excluded patients under the age of 18 years and unknown outcomes. We calculated the qSOFA, the Modified Early Warning Score (mEWS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and Injury Severity Score (ISS) based on patients' initial vital signs and assessments performed in the emergency department (ED). The primary outcome was mortality within 14 days of trauma. We analyzed qSOFA scores using multivariate logistic regression analysis and compared the predictive accuracy of these scoring systems using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Results: In total, 27,764 patients were analyzed. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis of the qSOFA, the adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence interval (CI) for mortality relative to a qSOFA score of 0 were 27.82 (13.63-56.79) for a qSOFA score of 1, 373.31 (183.47-759.57) for a qSOFA score of 2, and 494.07 (143.75-1698.15) for a qSOFA score of 3. In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for the qSOFA, mEWS, ISS, and RTS in predicting the outcomes, for mortality, the AUROC for the qSOFA (AUROC [95% CI]; 0.912 [0.871-0.952]) was significantly greater than those for the ISS (0.700 [0.608-0.793]) and RTS (0.160 [0.108-0.211]). Conclusions: The qSOFA was useful for predicting the prognosis of trauma patients evaluated in the ED.

• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• 제28권3호
• /
• pp.134-143
• /
• 2015

Purpose: Many patients are injured by trauma. And some of them expire due to severity of trauma. Various scoring systems have been introduced in grading severity and predicting mortality of trauma patients. This study is to evaluation the usefulness of factors for determining the severity and predicting the prognosis of the trauma victims. Methods: Data on the patients who visited our Emergency departments from January 2010 to December 2011 were retrospectively reviewed using electronic medical records. The patients were activated severe trauma team calling system. The patients were categorized as survivors and non-survivors. Univariated associations were calculated, and a multiple logistic regression analysis was used to determine variables associated with hospital mortality. Results: Two hundred sixty two(262) patients were enrolled, and the mortality rate was 25.6%. By multivariate analysis, lower respiration rate, lower Glasgow Coma Score, higher International Normalized Ratio and emergency transfusion within 6 hours were expected as severity and prognosis predict factors (each of odds ratio were 24.907, 14.282, 2.667 and 16.144). Conclusion: As predict factors, respiration rate, Glasgow Coma Score, International Normalized Ratio and emergency transfusion, are useful determining the severity and predicting prognosis of trauma victims.

• 대한안과학회지
• /
• 제59권11호
• /
• pp.1062-1070
• /
• 2018

목적: 소아청소년 환자에서 발생한 개방안구손상의 임상 양상을 분석하여 최종시력을 예측할 수 있는 인자를 알아보고, 최종시력을 예측하는 방법으로 안외상 점수(ocular trauma score, OTS)와 소아 안외상 점수(penetrating ocular trauma score, POTS)를 평가해 보고자 한다. 대상과 방법: 1993년 5월부터 2014년 4월까지 개방안구손상으로 본원에 내원한 18세 이하 소아청소년 환자 77명을 대상으로 의무기록을 후향적으로 분석하였다. 최종시력에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 인자들을 조사하였고, 최종시력을 예측하는 방법으로 OTS와 POTS를 receiver operating characteristic 곡선을 이용하여 평가해 보았다. 결과: 단변량 분석에서 20/200 미만의 초기시력, 안구파열, 7.0 mm 이상의 손상 크기, 망막박리, 수정체이탈, 총 수술 횟수는 불량한 최종시력(<20/200)과 유의한 관련성이 있었다. 반면에 20/32 이상의 좋은 최종시력의 경우 각막중심 침범 유무, 외상백내장 유무, 7.0 mm 미만의 손상 크기, 20/200 이상의 초기시력과 관련성이 있었다. OTS와 POTS 모두 최종시력을 예측하는 방법으로 진단적 가치가 있었으며, 통계적으로 두 점수 체계에 유의한 차이는 없었다. 결론: 소아청소년에게 발생한 개방안구손상에서 초기시력과 안구손상 크기는 최종시력에 영향을 주는 중요한 예측인자이다. 소아청소년 개방안구손상 환자의 최종시력 예측에 있어 기존의 안외상 점수(OTS)뿐만 아니라 소아 안외상 점수(POTS) 또한 좋은 예측도를 보여주어 둘 모두 유용한 평가 방법으로 생각된다.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• 제38권1호
• /
• pp.56-62
• /
• 2005

외상성 횡격막 손상은 진단이 어렵고, 치료가 늦어지는 경우 치명적일 수 있다. 본 연구는 외상성 횡격막 손상 환자들의 임상적 특징과 예후 예측 인자로서 외상 지표들의 유용성을 알아보고자 하였다. 대상 및 방법: 1995년 5월부터 2003년 6월까지 3차 의료기관에서 외상성 횡격막 손상으로 진단받은 23명의 성인 환자를 대상으로 하였다. 이 환자들의 Revised Trauma Score (RTS)와 Injtry Severity Score (ISS), Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), Acute Physical and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II점수를 구하여 사망여부 및 중환자실 입원기간과의 관계를 분석하였다. 결과: 손상 기전은 둔상 14명$(60.9{\%})$, 관통상 9명$(39.1{\%})$이었으며, 손상부위는 우측 11명($47.8{\%}$), 좌측 11명($47.8{\%}$), 양측 1명($4.4{\%}$)이었다. 15명($65.2{\%}$)의 환자에 대해서는 손상 후 24시간 이내에 진단이 이루어졌으며, 14명$(60.9{\%})$은 수술 전에 진단받았다. 진단 방법으로는 단순 흥부방사선 촬영, 전산화 단층촬영, 상부위장관 조영술과 위내시경을 사용하였으며, 단순 흉부방사선 촬영으로 의심한 경우는 9명$(39.1{\%})$이었다. 23명중 2명$(8.7{\%})$이 사망하였다. 결과 예측을 위해 환자의 나이, 수술 전까지 쇼크의 유무, 손상된 시간으로부터 수술까지의 시간과 사망 여부를 비교해 보았는데, 통계학적으로 유의할 만한 연관을 보이지 않았다. RTS와 ISS는 사망과 연관을 보였으나, TRISS나 APACHE II 점수는 연관을 보이지 않았다. 중환자실 재원 기간과 외상 지표들과의 상관관계를 분석한 결과, 중환자실 재원 기간은 RTS 점수가 높을수록 짧아지고(r: -0.501, p=0.000), APACHE II 점수가 높을수록 길어지는 경향을 보였다(r=0.737, p=0.026). 결론: 다발성 외상 환자를 진료함에 있어 외상성 횡격막 손상의 가능성을 의심하고 접근하는 것이 중요하며, 그 중증도와 예후를 예측하는 데 RTS가 간단하고 비교적 뛰어난 외상지표로 사용될 수 있을 것이다.