Melissa O'Neill, Sheldon Cheskes, Ian Drennan, Charles Keown-Stoneman, Steve Lin, Brodie Nolan
{"title":"院前生命体征缺失的伤害严重程度偏差:普遍性及其对创伤登记的影响。","authors":"Melissa O'Neill, Sheldon Cheskes, Ian Drennan, Charles Keown-Stoneman, Steve Lin, Brodie Nolan","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2024.111747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vital signs are important factors in assessing injury severity and guiding trauma resuscitation, especially among severely injured patients. Despite this, physiological data are frequently missing from trauma registries. This study aimed to evaluate the extent of missing prehospital data in a hospital-based trauma registry and to assess the associations between prehospital physiological data completeness and indicators of injury severity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review was conducted on all adult trauma patients brought directly to a level 1 trauma center in Toronto, Ontario by paramedics from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019. The proportion of missing data was evaluated for each variable and patterns of missingness were assessed. To investigate the associations between prehospital data completeness and injury severity factors, descriptive and unadjusted logistic regression analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3,528 patients were included. We considered prehospital data missing if any of heart rate, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate or oxygen saturation were incomplete. Each individual variable was missing from the registry in approximately 20 % of patients, with oxygen saturation missing most frequently (n = 831; 23.6 %). Over 25 % (n = 909) of patients were missing at least one prehospital vital sign, of which 69.1 % (n = 628) were missing all four of these variables. Patients with incomplete data were more severely injured, had higher mortality, and more frequently received lifesaving interventions such as blood transfusion and intubation. Patients were most likely to have missing prehospital physiological data if they died in the trauma bay (unadjusted OR: 9.79; 95 % CI: 6.35-15.10), did not survive to discharge (unadjusted OR: 3.55; 95 % CI: 2.76-4.55), or had a prehospital GCS less than 9 (OR: 3.24; 95 % CI: 2.59-4.06).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this single center trauma registry, key prehospital variables were frequently missing, particularly among more severely injured patients. Patients with missing data had higher mortality, more severe injury characteristics and received more life-saving interventions in the trauma bay, suggesting an injury severity bias in prehospital vital sign missingness. To ensure the validity of research based on trauma registry data, patterns of missingness must be carefully considered to ensure missing data is appropriately addressed.</p>","PeriodicalId":94042,"journal":{"name":"Injury","volume":" ","pages":"111747"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Injury severity bias in missing prehospital vital signs: Prevalence and implications for trauma registries.\",\"authors\":\"Melissa O'Neill, Sheldon Cheskes, Ian Drennan, Charles Keown-Stoneman, Steve Lin, Brodie Nolan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.injury.2024.111747\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vital signs are important factors in assessing injury severity and guiding trauma resuscitation, especially among severely injured patients. Despite this, physiological data are frequently missing from trauma registries. This study aimed to evaluate the extent of missing prehospital data in a hospital-based trauma registry and to assess the associations between prehospital physiological data completeness and indicators of injury severity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review was conducted on all adult trauma patients brought directly to a level 1 trauma center in Toronto, Ontario by paramedics from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019. The proportion of missing data was evaluated for each variable and patterns of missingness were assessed. To investigate the associations between prehospital data completeness and injury severity factors, descriptive and unadjusted logistic regression analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3,528 patients were included. We considered prehospital data missing if any of heart rate, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate or oxygen saturation were incomplete. Each individual variable was missing from the registry in approximately 20 % of patients, with oxygen saturation missing most frequently (n = 831; 23.6 %). Over 25 % (n = 909) of patients were missing at least one prehospital vital sign, of which 69.1 % (n = 628) were missing all four of these variables. Patients with incomplete data were more severely injured, had higher mortality, and more frequently received lifesaving interventions such as blood transfusion and intubation. Patients were most likely to have missing prehospital physiological data if they died in the trauma bay (unadjusted OR: 9.79; 95 % CI: 6.35-15.10), did not survive to discharge (unadjusted OR: 3.55; 95 % CI: 2.76-4.55), or had a prehospital GCS less than 9 (OR: 3.24; 95 % CI: 2.59-4.06).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this single center trauma registry, key prehospital variables were frequently missing, particularly among more severely injured patients. Patients with missing data had higher mortality, more severe injury characteristics and received more life-saving interventions in the trauma bay, suggesting an injury severity bias in prehospital vital sign missingness. To ensure the validity of research based on trauma registry data, patterns of missingness must be carefully considered to ensure missing data is appropriately addressed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94042,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Injury\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"111747\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Injury\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2024.111747\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2024.111747","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Injury severity bias in missing prehospital vital signs: Prevalence and implications for trauma registries.
Background: Vital signs are important factors in assessing injury severity and guiding trauma resuscitation, especially among severely injured patients. Despite this, physiological data are frequently missing from trauma registries. This study aimed to evaluate the extent of missing prehospital data in a hospital-based trauma registry and to assess the associations between prehospital physiological data completeness and indicators of injury severity.
Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on all adult trauma patients brought directly to a level 1 trauma center in Toronto, Ontario by paramedics from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019. The proportion of missing data was evaluated for each variable and patterns of missingness were assessed. To investigate the associations between prehospital data completeness and injury severity factors, descriptive and unadjusted logistic regression analyses were performed.
Results: A total of 3,528 patients were included. We considered prehospital data missing if any of heart rate, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate or oxygen saturation were incomplete. Each individual variable was missing from the registry in approximately 20 % of patients, with oxygen saturation missing most frequently (n = 831; 23.6 %). Over 25 % (n = 909) of patients were missing at least one prehospital vital sign, of which 69.1 % (n = 628) were missing all four of these variables. Patients with incomplete data were more severely injured, had higher mortality, and more frequently received lifesaving interventions such as blood transfusion and intubation. Patients were most likely to have missing prehospital physiological data if they died in the trauma bay (unadjusted OR: 9.79; 95 % CI: 6.35-15.10), did not survive to discharge (unadjusted OR: 3.55; 95 % CI: 2.76-4.55), or had a prehospital GCS less than 9 (OR: 3.24; 95 % CI: 2.59-4.06).
Conclusion: In this single center trauma registry, key prehospital variables were frequently missing, particularly among more severely injured patients. Patients with missing data had higher mortality, more severe injury characteristics and received more life-saving interventions in the trauma bay, suggesting an injury severity bias in prehospital vital sign missingness. To ensure the validity of research based on trauma registry data, patterns of missingness must be carefully considered to ensure missing data is appropriately addressed.