Determining Pediatric Trauma (New Injury Severity Score and Trauma Injury Severity Score)

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Brammer
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Pediatric Trauma ◽  
New Injury Severity Score ◽  
Trauma Injury

The New Injury Severity Score and the Evaluation of Pediatric Trauma

2001 ◽  
Vol 50 (6) ◽  
pp. 1106-1110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Grisoni ◽  
Anthony Stallion ◽  
Michael L. Nance ◽  
Joseph L. Lelli ◽  
Victor F. Garcia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Pediatric Trauma ◽  
New Injury Severity Score

NEW INJURY SEVERITY SCORE AND TRAUMA INJURY SEVERITY SCORE ARE SUPERIOR IN PREDICTING TRAUMA MORTALITY

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Magnus Chun ◽  
Yichi Zhang ◽  
Chad Becnel ◽  
Tommy Brown ◽  
Mohamed Hussein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
New Injury Severity Score ◽  
Trauma Mortality ◽  
Trauma Injury

scholarly journals Schockraum- und Schwerverletztenversorgung als „Verlustgeschäft“

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Gross ◽  
Felix Amsler
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Diagnosis Related Groups ◽  
Case Mix ◽  
Multivariate Analyse ◽  
New Injury Severity Score ◽  
Case Mix Index

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Es galt herauszufinden, wie kostendeckend die Versorgung potenziell Schwerverletzter in einem Schweizer Traumazentrum ist, und inwieweit Spitalgewinne bzw. -verluste mit patientenbezogenen Unfall‑, Behandlungs- oder Outcome-Daten korrelieren. Methodik Analyse aller 2018 im Schockraum (SR) bzw. mit Verletzungsschwere New Injury Severity Score (NISS) ≥8 notfallmäßig stationär behandelter Patienten eines Schwerverletztenzentrums der Schweiz (uni- und multivariate Analyse; p < 0,05). Ergebnisse Für das Studienkollektiv (n = 513; Ø NISS = 18) resultierte gemäß Spitalkostenträgerrechnung ein Defizit von 1,8 Mio. CHF. Bei einem Gesamtdeckungsgrad von 86 % waren 66 % aller Fälle defizitär (71 % der Allgemein- vs. 42 % der Zusatzversicherten; p < 0,001). Im Mittel betrug das Defizit 3493.- pro Patient (allg. Versicherte, Verlust 4545.-, Zusatzversicherte, Gewinn 1318.-; p < 0,001). Auch „in“- und „underlier“ waren in 63 % defizitär. SR-Fälle machten häufiger Verlust als Nicht-SR-Fälle (73 vs. 58 %; p = 0,002) wie auch Traumatologie- vs. Neurochirurgiefälle (72 vs. 55 %; p < 0,001). In der multivariaten Analyse ließen sich 43 % der Varianz erhaltener Erlöse mit den untersuchten Variablen erklären. Hingegen war der ermittelte Deckungsgrad nur zu 11 % (korr. R2) durch die Variablen SR, chirurgisches Fachgebiet, Intensivaufenthalt, Thoraxverletzungsstärke und Spitalletalität zu beschreiben. Case-Mix-Index gemäß aktuellen Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG) und Versicherungsklasse addierten weitere 13 % zu insgesamt 24 % erklärter Varianz. Diskussion Die notfallmäßige Versorgung potenziell Schwerverletzter an einem Schweizer Traumazentrum erweist sich nur in einem Drittel der Fälle als zumindest kostendeckend, dies v. a. bei Zusatzversicherten, Patienten mit einem hohen Case-Mix-Index oder einer IPS- bzw. kombinierten Polytrauma- und Schädel-Hirn-Trauma-DRG-Abrechnungsmöglichkeit.

scholarly journals Ten years of new injury severity score (NISS): is it a possible change?

2008 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 314-319 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lilia de Souza Nogueira ◽  
Cristiane de Alencar Domingues ◽  
Miriam de Araújo Campos ◽  
Regina Márcia Cardoso de Sousa
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Trauma Studies ◽  
New Injury Severity Score ◽  
Dependent Variables ◽  
Actual Range

The article is a bibliographic review which intends to present the actual range of researches comparing the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the New Injury Severity Score (NISS). Databases were searched using the keyword NISS, with 42 articles, 23 of which didn't compare the two indexes. Most part of the 19 selected articles showed that NISS has been more accurate in predicting the outcomes (dependent variables) than ISS, moreover in severe and specific trauma. Studies with populations between 1,000 and 10,000 resulted in NISS-favorable results, whereas studies with populations larger than 10,000 or smaller than 1,000 showed either NISS-favorable results or no difference between the two groups. However, there were no studies showing ISS-favorable results. These results and the easier calculation of NISS lead to a future replacement of ISS by NISS.

Novel Trauma Composite Score Is A More Reliable Predictor Of Mortality Than Injury Severity Score In Pediatric Trauma

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert C. Keskey ◽  
David A. Hampton ◽  
Henry Biermann ◽  
Justin Cirone ◽  
Tanya L. Zakrison ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Pediatric Trauma ◽  
Composite Score ◽  
Reliable Predictor

scholarly journals Measuring trauma severity using the 1998 and 2005 revisions of the Abbreviated Injury Scale

2014 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 641-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Carolina Barbosa Teixeira Lopes ◽  
Iveth Yamaguchi Whitaker
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Sao Paulo ◽  
São Paulo ◽  
Abbreviated Injury Scale ◽  
New Injury Severity Score ◽  
Trauma Severity

Objetivo: Comparar a gravidade das lesões e do trauma mensurada pelas versões da Abbreviated Injury Scale 1998 e 2005 e verificar a mortalidade nos escores Injury Severity Score e New Injury Severity Score nas duas versões.Método: Estudo transversal e retrospectivo analisou lesões de pacientes de trauma, de três hospitais universitários do município de São Paulo, Brasil. Cada lesão foi codificada com Abbreviated Injury Scale 1998 e 2005. Os testes estatísticos aplicados foram Wilcoxon, McNemar-Bowker, Kappa e teste Z.Resultados: A comparação das duas versões resultou em discordância significante de escores em algumas regiões corpóreas. Com a versão 2005 os níveis de gravidade da lesão e do trauma foram significantemente reduzidos e a mortalidade foi mais elevada em escores mais baixos. Conclusão: Houve redução da gravidade da lesão e do trauma e alteração no percentual de mortalidade com o uso da Abbreviated Injury Scale 2005.





scholarly journals Clinical Outcome and Management for Geriatric Traumatic Injury: Analysis of 2688 Cases in the Emergency Department of a Teaching Hospital in Taiwan

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. 255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meng-Yu Wu ◽  
Yu-Long Chen ◽  
Giou-Teng Yiang ◽  
Chia-Jung Li ◽  
Amy Lin
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Strong Predictor ◽  
Traumatic Injury ◽  
Geriatric Trauma ◽  
Shock Index ◽  
New Injury Severity Score

Geriatric traumatic injuries in emergency departments are frequent and associated with higher mortality rates and catastrophic functional outcomes. Several prediction scores have been established to manage traumatic patients, including the shock index (SI), revised trauma score (RTS), injury severity score (ISS), trauma injury severity score (TRISS), and new injury severity score (NISS). However, it was necessary to investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of care for the geriatric traumatic population. In addition, image studies such as computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging play an important role in early diagnosis and timely intervention. However, few studies focus on this aspect. The association between the benefit of carrying out more image studies and clinical outcomes remains unclear. In this study, we included a total of 2688 traumatic patients and analyzed the clinical outcomes and predicting factors in terms of geriatric trauma via pre-hospital and in-hospital analysis. Our evaluation revealed that a shock index ≥1 may be not a strong predictor of geriatric trauma due to the poor physical response in the aging population. This should be modified in geriatric patients. Other systems, like RTS, ISS, TRISS, and NISS, were significant in terms of predicting the clinical outcome.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document