scholarly journals An overview of the injury severity score and the new injury severity score

2001 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Stevenson
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
New Injury Severity Score

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.

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.

scholarly journals Abdominal Trauma in Durban, South Africa: Factors Influencing Outcome

2012 ◽  
Vol 97 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.N. Mnguni ◽  
D.J.J. Muckart ◽  
T.E. Madiba
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Abdominal Trauma ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Penetrating Trauma ◽  
New Injury Severity Score ◽  
Transfusion Requirements ◽  
Surgical Ward ◽  
Severity Of Injury ◽  
A Prospective Study

Abstract Abdominal injury as a result of both blunt and penetrating trauma has an appreciable mortality rate from hemorrhage and sepsis. In this article, we present our experience with the management of abdominal trauma in Durban and investigate factors that influence outcome. We performed a prospective study of patients with abdominal trauma in one surgical ward at King Edward VIII Hospital in Durban over a period of 7 years, from 1998 through 2004. Demographic details, cause of injury, delay before surgery, clinical presentation, findings at surgery, management and outcome were documented. There were 488 patients with abdominal trauma with a mean age of 29.2 ± 10.7 years. There were 440 penetrating injuries (240 firearm wounds; 200 stab wounds) and 48 blunt injuries. The mean delay before surgery was 11.7 ± 16.4 hours, and 55 patients (11%) presented in shock. Four hundred and forty patients underwent laparotomy, and 48 were managed nonoperatively. The Injury Severity Score was 11.1 ± 6.7, and the New Injury Severity Score was 17.1 ± 11.1. One hundred and thirty-seven patients (28%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), with a mean ICU stay of 3.6 ± 5.5 days. One hundred and thirty-two patients developed complications (28%), and 52 (11%) died. Shock, acidosis, increased transfusion requirements, number of organs injured, and injury severity were all associated with higher mortality. Delay before surgery had no influence on outcome. Hospital stay was 9.2 ± 10.8 days. The majority of abdominal injuries in our environment are due to firearms. Physiological instability, mechanism of injury, severity of injury, and the number of organs injured influence outcome.

scholarly journals A Comparative Study Between Two Combat Injury Severity Scores

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafael García Cañas ◽  
Ricardo Navarro Suay ◽  
Carlos Rodríguez Moro ◽  
Diana M Crego Vita ◽  
Javier Arias Díaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Combat Injury ◽  
New Injury Severity Score ◽  
Severity Scores ◽  
Trauma Scoring ◽  
Combat Casualties ◽  
The Military

ABSTRACT Introduction In recent years, specific trauma scoring systems have been developed for military casualties. The objective of this study was to examine the discrepancies in severity scores of combat casualties between the Abbreviated Injury Scale 2005-Military (mAIS) and the Military Combat Injury Scale (MCIS) and a review of the current literature on the application of trauma scoring systems in the military setting. Methods A cross-sectional, descriptive, and retrospective study was conducted between May 1, 2005, and December 31, 2014. The study population consisted of all combat casualties attended in the Spanish Role 2 deployed in Herat (Afghanistan). We used the New Injury Severity Score (NISS) as reference score. Severity of each injury was calculated according to mAIS and MCIS, respectively. The severity of each casualty was calculated according to the NISS based on the mAIS (Military New Injury Severity Score—mNISS) and MCIS (Military Combat Injury Scale-New Injury Severity Score—MCIS-NISS). Casualty severity were grouped by severity levels (mild—scores: 1-8, moderate—scores: 9-15, severe—scores: 16-24, and critical—scores: 25-75). Results Nine hundred and eleven casualties were analyzed. Most were male (96.37%) with a median age of 27 years. Afghan patients comprised 71.13%. Air medevac was the main casualty transportation method (80.13). Explosion (64.76%) and gunshot wound (34.68%) mechanisms predominated. Overall mortality was 3.51%. Median mNISS and MCIS-NISS were similar in nonsurvivors (36 [IQR, 25-49] vs. [IQR, 25-48], respectively) but different in survivors, 9 (IQR, 4-17) vs. 5 (IQR, 2-13), respectively (P &lt; .0001). The mNISS and MCIS-NISS were discordant in 34.35% (n = 313). Among cases with discordant severity scores, the median difference between mNISS and MCIS-NISS was 9 (IQR, 4-16); range, 1 to 57. Conclusion Our study findings suggest that discrepancies in injury severity levels may be observed in one in three of the casualties when using mNISS and MCIS-NISS.

scholarly journals Severity of trauma victims admitted in intensive care units: comparative study among different indexes

2009 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 1037-1042 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lilia de Souza Nogueira ◽  
Regina Marcia Cardoso de Sousa ◽  
Cristiane de Alencar Domingues
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Injury Severity Score ◽  
Intensive Care Units ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
New Injury Severity Score ◽  
Saps Ii ◽  
Logistic Organ Dysfunction ◽  
Trauma Victims

This study compared the performance of the Injury Severity Score (ISS) with the New Injury Severity Score (NISS) and also the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) with the Logistic Organ Dysfunction System (LODS) in trauma victims, in order to predict mortality and length of stay in Intensive Care Units (ICU), besides identifying which indexes have been the most effective to estimate these results. A retrospective analysis was done in the records of 185 victims admitted in ICU between June and December 2006. None of the four indexes properly discriminated the patients according to length of stay at the ICU. The ISS and the NISS did not show a good discriminating capacity in case of death, but the SAPS II and the LODS presented good performance to estimate mortality at the ICU. Results pointed towards the use of SAPS II and LODS when trauma victims are admitted in an ICU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document