CDC field triage criteria accurately predicts outcomes in high impact trauma.

Abstract

Background: The precision of emergency medical services (EMS) triage criteria dictates whether an injured patient receives appropriate care. The trauma triage protocol is a decision scheme that groups patients into triage categories of major, moderate and minor. We hypothesized that there is a difference between trauma triage category and injury severity score (ISS).

Methods: This retrospective, observational study was conducted to investigate a difference between trauma triage category and ISS. Bivariate analysis was used to test for differences between the subgroup means. The differences between the group means on each measure were analyzed for direction and statistical significance using ANOVA for continuous variables and chi square tests for categorical variables. Logistic and linear regressions were performed to evaluate factors predicting mortality, ICU length of stay.

Results: With respect to trauma triage category, our findings indicate that minor and moderate triage categories are similar with respect to ISS, GCS, ICU LOS, hospital LOS, and mortality. However, after excluding for low impact injuries (falls), differences between the minor and moderate categories were evident when comparing to ISS, GCS, ICU LOS, and hospital LOS. Additionally, after excluding for low impact injures, ISS, ICU LOS, and hospital stay were found to correlate well with trauma triage category.

Conclusions: In this retrospective, observational study significant differences were not seen when comparing ISS with the trauma triage categories of moderate and minor during our initial analysis. However, a difference was found after excluding for low impact injuries. These findings suggest that CDC criteria accurately predicts outcomes in high impact trauma.