• Injury · Sep 2022

    Interest of the MGAP score on in-hospital trauma patients: Comparison with TRISS, ISS and NISS scores.

    • Emily J Larkin, Marieke K Jones, Steven D Young, and Jeffrey S Young.
    • Department of Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, United States. Electronic address: ejl6ny@virginia.edu.
    • Injury. 2022 Sep 1; 53 (9): 3059-3064.

    AbstractTrauma scoring systems were created to predict mortality and enhance triage capabilities. However, efficacy of scoring systems to predict mortality and accuracy of originally reported severity thresholds remains uncertain. A single-center, retrospective study was conducted at University of Virginia (UVA), an American College of Surgeons verified Level I trauma center. We compared four scoring systems: MGAP (Mechanism, Glasgow Coma Scale, Age, and arterial pressure), Injury Severity Score (ISS), New Injury Severity Score (NISS), and Trauma Related Injury Severity Score (TRISS) to predict in-hospital mortality and disposition from the emergency department to higher acuity level of care including mortality (i.e. operating room, intensive care unit, morgue) versus standard floor admission using area under the curve (AUC) for receiver operating characteristic analysis. Second, we examined sensitivity of these scores at standard thresholds to determine if adjustments were needed to minimize under-triage (sensitivity ≥95%). TRISS was the best predictor of mortality in a cohort of n = 16,265 with AUC of 0.920 (95% CI: 0.911-0.929, p<0.0001), followed by MGAP with AUC of 0.900 (95% CI: 0.889-0.911, p<0.0001), and finally ISS and NISS (0.830 (95% CI: 0.814-0.847) and 0.827 (95% CI: 0.809-0.844) respectively). NISS was the best predictor of high acuity disposition with an AUC of 0.729 (95% CI: 0.721-0.736, p<0.0001), followed by ISS with AUC of 0.714 (95% CI: 0.707-0.722, p<0.0001), and finally TRISS and MGAP (0.673 (95% CI: 0.665-0.682) and 0.613 (95% CI: 0.604-0.621) respectively (p<0.0001). At historic thresholds, no scoring system displayed adequate sensitivity to predict mortality, with values ranging from 73% for ISS to 80% for NISS. In conclusion, in the reported study cohort, TRISS was the best predictor of mortality while NISS was the best predictor of high acuity disposition. We also stress updating scoring system thresholds to achieve ideal sensitivity, and investigating how scoring systems derived to predict mortality perform when predicting indicators of morbidity such as disposition from the emergency department.Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…