• H M Lossius, A Langhelle, E Søreide, E S-reide, J Pillgram-Larsen, T A Lossius, P Laake, and P A Steen.
• Division of Surgery, Ulleval University Hospital, Oslo, N-0407, Norway. hamolo@online.no
• Resuscitation. 2001 Sep 1;50(3):263-72.

Study ObjectiveTo collect and present retrospectively the recommended core data from the Utstein style, analyse factors associated with outcome in major trauma, and discuss the value of the Utstein style definition of major trauma.DesignA retrospective trauma cohort study.SettingA Norwegian trauma system with a 1200 bed combined local and referral trauma hospital without a formal trauma registry, covering a population of approximately 2.0 million.Participants3391 injured patients admitted 12 months from January 15, 1996.Main Outcome MeasuresRecommended core data from the Utstein style, and factors associated with outcome defined as in-hospital death within 30 days.Results225 patients had an injury severity score (ISS)>15. In each of the 225 patients, we were able to obtain at least 47% of the recommended core data. Age >70 years, fall as a mechanism of injury, and a Trauma Score (TS)< or =14 were significantly associated with poor outcome. Of 22 with no major trauma (ISS<16), two died in hospital and 20 had an intensive care unit stay of more than 2 days.ConclusionWe found it difficult to collect retrospectively the recommended core data of the Utstein style. Age and physiological alterations (TS) were significantly related to outcome. The recommended definition of major trauma (ISS>15) did not cover all life-threatening injuries. The implementation of trauma registries based on the Utstein style recommendations could facilitate system evaluation and comparison, but definitions and categorizations should be further developed. Efforts should be made to reduce the number of core data.

27 keywords...

hide…