Immediate Operative Trauma Assessment Score: A Simple and Reliable Predictor of Mortality in Trauma Patients Undergoing Urgent/Emergent Surgery.

Elliot Silver, J. Nahmias, M. Lekawa, Kenji Inaba, M. Schellenberg, C. D. de Virgilio, A. Grigorian
{"title":"Immediate Operative Trauma Assessment Score: A Simple and Reliable Predictor of Mortality in Trauma Patients Undergoing Urgent/Emergent Surgery.","authors":"Elliot Silver, J. Nahmias, M. Lekawa, Kenji Inaba, M. Schellenberg, C. D. de Virgilio, A. Grigorian","doi":"10.1177/00031348241248784","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Many current trauma mortality prediction tools are either too intricate or rely on data not readily available during a trauma patient's initial evaluation. Moreover, none are tailored to those necessitating urgent or emergent surgery. Our objective was to design a practical, user-friendly scoring tool using immediately available variables, and then compare its efficacy to the widely-known Revised Trauma Score (RTS). Methods: The adult 2017-2021 Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) database was queried to identify patients ≥18 years old undergoing any urgent/emergent operation (direct from Emergency Department to operating room). Patients were divided into derivation and validation groups. A three-step methodology was used. First, multiple logistic regression models were created to determine risk of death using only variables available upon arrival. Second, the weighted average and relative impact of each independent predictor was used to derive an easily calculated Immediate Operative Trauma Assessment Score (IOTAS). We then validated IOTAS using AUROC and compared it to RTS. Results: From 249 208 patients in the derivation-set, 14 635 (5.9%) died. Age ≥65, Glasgow Coma Scale score <9, hypotension (SBP <90 mmHg), and tachycardia (>120/min) on arrival were identified as independent predictors for mortality. Using these, the IOTAS was structured, offering scores between 0-8. The AUROC for this was .88. A clear escalation in mortality was observed across scores: from 4.4% at score 1 to 60.5% at score 8. For the validation set (250 182 patients; mortality rate 5.8%), the AUROC remained consistent at .87, surpassing RTS's AUROC of .83. Conclusion: IOTAS is a novel, accurate, and now validated tool that is intuitive and efficient in predicting mortality for trauma patients requiring urgent or emergent surgeries. It outperforms RTS, and thereby may help guide clinicians when determining the best course of action in patient management as well as counseling patients and their families.","PeriodicalId":325363,"journal":{"name":"The American Surgeon","volume":" 42","pages":"31348241248784"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348241248784","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Many current trauma mortality prediction tools are either too intricate or rely on data not readily available during a trauma patient's initial evaluation. Moreover, none are tailored to those necessitating urgent or emergent surgery. Our objective was to design a practical, user-friendly scoring tool using immediately available variables, and then compare its efficacy to the widely-known Revised Trauma Score (RTS). Methods: The adult 2017-2021 Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) database was queried to identify patients ≥18 years old undergoing any urgent/emergent operation (direct from Emergency Department to operating room). Patients were divided into derivation and validation groups. A three-step methodology was used. First, multiple logistic regression models were created to determine risk of death using only variables available upon arrival. Second, the weighted average and relative impact of each independent predictor was used to derive an easily calculated Immediate Operative Trauma Assessment Score (IOTAS). We then validated IOTAS using AUROC and compared it to RTS. Results: From 249 208 patients in the derivation-set, 14 635 (5.9%) died. Age ≥65, Glasgow Coma Scale score <9, hypotension (SBP <90 mmHg), and tachycardia (>120/min) on arrival were identified as independent predictors for mortality. Using these, the IOTAS was structured, offering scores between 0-8. The AUROC for this was .88. A clear escalation in mortality was observed across scores: from 4.4% at score 1 to 60.5% at score 8. For the validation set (250 182 patients; mortality rate 5.8%), the AUROC remained consistent at .87, surpassing RTS's AUROC of .83. Conclusion: IOTAS is a novel, accurate, and now validated tool that is intuitive and efficient in predicting mortality for trauma patients requiring urgent or emergent surgeries. It outperforms RTS, and thereby may help guide clinicians when determining the best course of action in patient management as well as counseling patients and their families.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
创伤即时手术评估评分:简单可靠的急诊/紧急手术创伤患者死亡率预测指标。
目的:目前的许多创伤死亡率预测工具要么过于复杂,要么依赖于创伤患者初步评估时不易获得的数据。此外,这些工具都不适合需要紧急手术的患者。我们的目标是利用即时可用的变量设计出一种实用、用户友好的评分工具,然后将其与广为人知的修订创伤评分(RTS)进行比较。方法:查询成人 2017-2021 年创伤质量改进计划(TQIP)数据库,以确定接受任何紧急/急诊手术(从急诊科直接到手术室)的≥18 岁患者。患者被分为推导组和验证组。采用三步法。首先,建立多元逻辑回归模型,仅使用到达时可用的变量来确定死亡风险。其次,利用每个独立预测因子的加权平均值和相对影响,得出易于计算的即时手术创伤评估分数(IOTAS)。然后,我们使用 AUROC 验证了 IOTAS,并将其与 RTS 进行了比较。结果:在推导组的 249 208 名患者中,有 14 635 人(5.9%)死亡。年龄≥65岁、抵达时格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分120分/分钟)被确定为死亡率的独立预测因素。根据这些因素,对 IOTAS 进行了结构化,提供 0-8 分。其AUROC为0.88。不同分数的死亡率明显上升:从 1 分时的 4.4% 上升到 8 分时的 60.5%。在验证集(250 182 名患者;死亡率为 5.8%)中,AUROC 一直保持在 0.87,超过了 RTS 的 AUROC 0.83。结论IOTAS 是一种新颖、准确并经过验证的工具,在预测需要紧急手术的创伤患者死亡率方面直观高效。它的表现优于 RTS,因此可以帮助指导临床医生确定患者管理的最佳方案,并为患者及其家属提供咨询。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Bile Duct Injuries During Urgent Cholecystectomy at a Safety Net Teaching Hospital: Attending Experience and Time of Day May Matter. From Bytes to Best Practices: Tracing ChatGPT-3.5's Evolution and Alignment With the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® Guidelines in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Management. The USCENTCOM Walking Blood Bank Performance Benchmark and Anticipated Benefit of Universal Low Titer Type O Screening. Contemporary Outcomes and Patterns of Injury Associated With Parachuting Accidents. To Drain or Not: Drainage Procedures Remain a Central Tenet of Management of Infected Collections in Acute Pancreatitis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1