Topic
Injury Severity Score
About: Injury Severity Score is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 10740 publications have been published within this topic receiving 379542 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: Results of this investigation indicate that the Injury Severity Score represents an important step in solving the problem of summarizing injury severity, especially in patients with multiple trauma.
Abstract: A method for comparing death rates of groups of injured persons was developed, using hospital and medical examiner data for more than two thousand persons. The first step was determination of the extent to which injury severity as rated by the Abbreviated Injury Scale correlates with patient survival. Substantial correlation was demonstrated. Controlling for severity of the primary injury made it possible to measure the effect on mortality of additional injuries. Injuries that in themselves would not normally be life-threatening were shown to have a marked effect on mortality when they occurred in combination with other injuries. An Injury Severity Score was developed that correlates well with survival and provides a numerical description of the overall severity of injury for patients with multiple trauma. Results of this investigation indicate that the Injury Severity Score represents an important step in solving the problem of summarizing injury severity, especially in patients with multiple trauma.
8,174 citations
TL;DR: The TRISS method as mentioned in this paper is a standard approach for evaluating outcome of trauma care, which uses Anatomic, physiologic, and age characteristics to quantify probability of survival as related to severity of injury.
Abstract: Evaluation of trauma care must be an integral part of any system designed for care of seriously injured patients. However, outcome review should offer comparability to national standards or norms. The TRISS method offers a standard approach for evaluating outcome of trauma care. Anatomic, physiologic, and age characteristics are used to quantify probability of survival as related to severity of injury. TRISS offers a means of case identification for quality assurance review on a local basis, as well as a means of comparison of outcome for different populations of trauma patients. Methods for calculating statistics associated with TRISS are presented. The Z and M statistics are explained with the nonstatistician in mind. We feel this article is a source for those interested in developing or upgrading trauma care evaluation.
2,074 citations
TL;DR: There was an improved access to the medical system, greater proportion of late deaths due to brain injury and lack of the classic trimodal distribution, in the Denver City and County trauma system during 1992.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: Recognizing the impact of the 1977 San Francisco study of trauma deaths in trauma care, our purpose was to reassess those findings in a contemporary trauma system. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All trauma deaths occurring in Denver City and County during 1992 were reviewed; data were obtained by cross-referencing four databases: paramedic trip reports, trauma registries, coroner autopsy reports and police reports. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 289 postinjury fatalities; mean age was 36.8 +/- 1.2 years and mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 35.7 +/- 1.2. Predominant injury mechanisms were gunshot wounds in 121 (42%), motorvehicle accidents in 75 (38%) and falls in 23 (8%) cases. Seven (2%) individuals sustained lethal burns. Ninety eight (34%) deaths occurred in the pre-hospital setting. The remaining 191 (66%) patients were transported to the hospital. Of these, 154 (81%) died in the first 48 hours (acute), 11 (6%) within three to seven days (early) and 26 (14%) after seven days (late). Central nervous system injuries were the most frequent cause of death (42%), followed by exsanguination (39%) and organ failure (7%). While acute and early deaths were mostly due to the first two causes, organ failure was the most common cause of late death (61%). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with the previous report, we observed similar injury mechanisms, demographics and causes of death. However, in our experience, there was an improved access to the medical system, greater proportion of late deaths due to brain injury and lack of the classic trimodal distribution.
1,701 citations
TL;DR: To significantly impact the outcome of combat casualties with PS injury, strategies must be developed to mitigate hemorrhage and optimize airway management or reduce the time interval between the battlefield point of injury and surgical intervention.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Critical evaluation of all aspects of combat casualty care, including mortality, with a special focus on the incidence and causes of potentially preventable deaths among US combat fatalities, is central to identifying gaps in knowledge, training, equipment, and execution of battlefield trauma care. The impetus to produce this analysis was to develop a comprehensive perspective of battlefield death, concentrating on deaths that occurred in the preYmedical treatment facility (pre-MTF) environment. METHODS: The Armed Forces Medical Examiner Service Mortality Surveillance Division was used to identify Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom combat casualties from October 2001 to June 2011 who died from injury in the deployed environment. The autopsy records, perimortem records, photographs on file, and Mortality Trauma Registry of the Armed Forces Medical Examiner Service were used to compile mechanism of injury, cause of injury, medical intervention performed, Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score, and Injury Severity Score (ISS) on all lethal injuries. All data were used by the expert panel for the conduct of the potential for injury survivability assessment of this study. RESULTS: For the study interval between October 2001 and June 2011, 4,596 battlefield fatalities were reviewed and analyzed. The stratification of mortality demonstrated that 87.3% of all injury mortality occurred in the pre-MTF environment. Of the pre-MTF deaths, 75.7% (n = 3,040) were classified as nonsurvivable, and 24.3% (n = 976) were deemed potentially survivable (PS). The injury/physiologic focus of PS acute mortality was largely associated with hemorrhage (90.9%). The site of lethal hemorrhage was truncal (67.3%), followed by junctional (19.2%) and peripheral-extremity (13.5%) hemorrhage. CONCLUSION: Most battlefield casualties died of their injuries before ever reaching a surgeon. As most pre-MTF deaths are nonsurvivable, mitigation strategies to impact outcomes in this population need to be directed toward injury prevention. To significantly impact the outcome of combat casualties with PS injury, strategies must be developed to mitigate hemorrhage and optimize airway management or reduce the time interval between the battlefield point of injury and surgical intervention. Understanding battlefield mortality is a vital component of the military trauma system. Emphasis on this analysis should be placed on trauma system optimization, evidence-based improvements in Tactical Combat Casualty Care guidelines, data-driven research, and development to remediate gaps in care and relevant training and equipment enhancements that will increase the survivability of the fighting force. (J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73: S431YS437. Copyright * 2012 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins)
1,411 citations
TL;DR: The injury severity score has changed little in the past decade, but the number of hospital admissions and the severity of the injuries has changed significantly.
Abstract: THE INJURY SEVERITY SCORE: AN UPDATE SUSAN BAKER;BRIAN O'NEILL; The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care
1,405 citations