• Reyhan Orhon, Sevki Hakan Eren, Sule Karadayı, Ilhan Korkmaz, Abuzer Coşkun, Mehmet Eren, and Nurkay Katrancıoğlu.
• Department of Emergency Medicine, Gaziantep State Hospital; Gaziantep, Turkey.
• Ulus Travma Acil Cer. 2014 Jul 1;20(4):258-64.

BackgroundIn this study, we compared the anatomical, and physiological scoring systems trauma revised injury severity score (TRISS), revised trauma score (RTS), injury severity score (ISS), new injury severity score (NISS) to each other, to find out the most accurate and reliable trauma score for the risk classification of morbidity and mortality among the trauma patients.MethodsThis is a cross-sectional study, which included 633 patients who admitted to our University Hospital Emergency Department during an 8-month period due to trauma. All blunt and penetrating traumas (traffic accident, assault, etc.) patients above 16 years were included.ResultsArrival time trauma scores (ISS, NISS, RTS, and TRISS) of the patients was calculated. Mean trauma score for the mortality prediction was calculated, and the p value was equal for all (p=0.001). Trauma scores were also analyzed for the hospitalization time in intensive care unit (ICU). While NISS, RTS, and TRISS values were significant (p=0.048, p=0.048, and p=0.017, respectively), ISS value was not significant (p=0.257) for predicting the ICU hospitalization time. Only TRISS was a good predictor for the mechanically ventilation time in ICU patients (p=0.01).ConclusionIn conclusion, we determined that the anatomical trauma scores (NISS, ISS) predicted the hospitalization and ICU necessities better, whereas TRISS, an anatomo-physiological trauma score, defined the ICU hospitalization and mechanically ventilation time better.

42 keywords...

hide…