scholarly journals Predictive value of Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and Revised Trauma Score (RTS) for the short-term prognosis of emergency trauma patients: a retrospective study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e041882
Author(s):  
Zhejun Yu ◽  
Feng Xu ◽  
Du Chen
Keyword(s):  
Early Warning ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Southern China ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Early Warning Score ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Survival Group ◽  
Revised Trauma Score ◽  
Trauma Score

ObjectivesThis study aimed to assess the predictive value of the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and Revised Trauma Score (RTS) for emergency trauma patients who died within 24 hours.DesignA retrospective, single-centred study.SettingThis study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Southern China.ParticipantsA total of 1739 patients with acute trauma, aged 16 years or older who presented to the emergency department from 1 November 2016 to 30 November 2019, were included.Interventions noneNone.Outcome24-hour mortality was the primary outcome of trauma.Results1739 patients were divided into the survival group (1709 patients,98.27%), and the non-survival group (30 patients,1.73%). Crude OR and adjusted OR of MEWS were 1.99, 95% CI (1.73 to 2.29), and 2.00, 95% CI (1.74 to 2.31), p<0.001, respectively. Crude OR and adjusted OR of RTS were 0.62, 95% CI (0.55 to 0.69) and 0.61, 95% CI (0.55 to 0.68), p<0.001, respectively. The area under the curve of MEWS was significantly higher than that of RTS (p=0.005): 0.927, 95% CI (0.914 to 0.939) vs 0.799, 95% CI (0.779 to 0.817).ConclusionsBoth MEWS and RTS were independent predictors of the short-term prognosis in emergency trauma patients, MEWS had better predictive efficacy.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the Revised Trauma Score in Predicting Outcomes of Trauma Patients

2013 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 234-239
Author(s):  
H Li ◽  
WF Shen ◽  
XJ He ◽  
JS Wu ◽  
JH Yi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Revised Trauma Score ◽  
Trauma Score

Perineal Injuries at a Large Urban Trauma Center: Injury Patterns and Outcomes

2009 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 317-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrizio Petrone ◽  
Kenji Inaba ◽  
Nir Wasserberg ◽  
Pedro G. R. Teixeira ◽  
Grant Sarkisyan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Los Angeles ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Vital Signs ◽  
University Of Southern California ◽  
Associated Injuries ◽  
Survival Group ◽  
Revised Trauma Score ◽  
Perineal Injuries ◽  
Trauma Score

The purpose of this study was to describe the characteristics of this unique patient population, their clinical presentations, and outcomes. The Los Angeles County and University of Southern California Medical Center Trauma Registry was used to retrospectively identify patients who sustained perineal injuries. Information included gender, age, vital signs, trauma scores, mechanisms of injury, studies performed, surgeries performed, and outcomes. Pediatric patients and injuries related to obstetric trauma were not included. Sixty-nine patients were identified between February 1, 1992 and October 31, 2005. One patient died on arrival; 85 per cent (58 of 68) were males, mean age was 30 ± 12 years, and there was a penetrating mechanism in 56 per cent. Vital signs on admission were systolic blood pressure 119 ± 33 mmHg, heart rate 94 ± 27 beats/minute, and respiratory rate 20 ± 6 breaths/min. Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was 13 ± 3, Revised Trauma Score (RTS) was 7.2 ± 1.5, and Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 11 ± 12. CT scan was obtained for 23 (33%) patients. Lower extremity fractures were 35 per cent and pelvic fractures 32 per cent. The most common surgery was debridement and drainage, diversion with colostomy in five patients (7%). Overall mortality was 10 per cent. Mortality group mean scores were: GCS, 6; RTS, 5.74; and ISS, 34. The survival group mean scores were: GCS, 14; RTS, 7.7; and ISS, 8. There was a statistically significant association between mortality and GCS, RTS, and ISS scores ( P < 0.001). Most patients with perineal injuries (93%) can be managed without colostomy. Associated injuries are not uncommon, particularly bony fractures. Mortality is mostly the result of exsanguination related to associated injuries.

scholarly journals Cox Regression Analysis of 1739 Emergency Trauma Patients

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Shen ◽  
Feng Xu ◽  
Du Chen
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Oxygen Saturation ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Cox Regression Analysis ◽  
Revised Trauma Score ◽  
Independent Risk Factors ◽  
Trauma Score

Abstract BACKGROUND: Trauma is a damage caused by physical harm from external source. It has been one of the major causes of mortality. The purpose of this study was to explore the risk factors related to mortality among emergency trauma patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective study in trauma center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. The data were obtained from trauma database with patients registered from November 1, 2016 to November 30, 2019.Shapiro–Wilk test, Mann-Whitney test and Likelihood-ratio Chi squared test were used to assess the survival pattern. Cox regressions were performed to calculate the hazard ratios (HRs) of variables for death. RESULTS: The total 1739 emergency trauma patients, 44 (2.53%) died during the study period and 1695 (97.47%) were survival. Through univariable and multivariable Cox regression analysis, three independent risk factors for emergency death were screened out: pulse (Crude HR: 0.97, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.96-0.98; Adjuste HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.02-1.06), pulse oxygen saturation (Crude HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.95-0.97; Adjuste HR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.91-0.97) and Revised Trauma Score (Crude HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.65-0.74; Adjuste HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.64-0.97).CONCLUSION: The survival outcome of emergency trauma patients was influenced by many factors. Pulse, pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2 ) and Revised Trauma Score (RTS) were the independent risk factors for mortality. Accurate analysis and judgment of the risk factors can improve cure efficiency and long-term survival rate.

scholarly journals Comparison of early warning scores for sepsis early identification and prediction in the general ward setting

JAMIA Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean C Yu ◽  
Nirmala Shivakumar ◽  
Kevin Betthauser ◽  
Aditi Gupta ◽  
Albert M Lai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Positive Predictive Value ◽  
Early Warning ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Early Identification ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
General Ward ◽  
Early Warning Score ◽  
Patient Acuity ◽  
Early Warning Scores

Abstract The objective of this study was to directly compare the ability of commonly used early warning scores (EWS) for early identification and prediction of sepsis in the general ward setting. For general ward patients at a large, academic medical center between early-2012 and mid-2018, common EWS and patient acuity scoring systems were calculated from electronic health records (EHR) data for patients that both met and did not meet Sepsis-3 criteria. For identification of sepsis at index time, National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS 2) had the highest performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.803 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.795–0.811], area under the precision recall curves: 0.130 [95% CI: 0.121–0.140]) followed NEWS, Modified Early Warning Score, and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA). Using validated thresholds, NEWS 2 also had the highest recall (0.758 [95% CI: 0.736–0.778]) but qSOFA had the highest specificity (0.950 [95% CI: 0.948–0.952]), positive predictive value (0.184 [95% CI: 0.169–0.198]), and F1 score (0.236 [95% CI: 0.220–0.253]). While NEWS 2 outperformed all other compared EWS and patient acuity scores, due to the low prevalence of sepsis, all scoring systems were prone to false positives (low positive predictive value without drastic sacrifices in sensitivity), thus leaving room for more computationally advanced approaches.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document