• Feray Yıldırım Aydın and Dilek Dülger.
• Department of General Surgery, 29 Mayıs State Hospital, Ankara-Turkey.
• Ulus Travma Acil Cer. 2020 Mar 1; 26 (2): 242-246.

BackgroundThe degree of damage presents a pressing issue in determining trauma severity. Various trauma-scoring systems, such as the injury severity and revised trauma scores, are used worldwide. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the functionalities of these two trauma scoring systems, which are presently used frequently and have scientifically evolved at the state hospital level.MethodsFollowing approval from the ethics committee to conduct clinical studies with retrospective archive screening, data between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2017, were retrospectively analysed for determining the factors affecting mortality in all patients diagnosed with traumatic injury in 29 Mayıs State Hospital. Incomplete or unclear data were excluded from this study. Mean and standard deviation were used for continuous variables; percentage and frequency values were used for binary variables. For evaluating continuous variables, Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test was used in independent groups based on their distribution status. Dichotomous variables were evaluated using the chi-square test. The results and significant in univariate analyses were evaluated again by the linear and binary logistic regression model.ResultsMean age of all patients was 37.53±14.47 years [male (35.68±13.9) versus female (40.61±15.1) (p=0.116)]. Mean injury trauma score for the general population was 3.18±8.46. No dissimilarity was noted regarding gender for the injury severity score (ISS) [(3.93±10.49 versus 1.91±2.34) (p=0.727)]. Regarding age, for revised trauma score (RTS), no statistical significance was noted [(7.60±0.91 versus 7.81±0.16) (p=0.207)]. Regarding the injury mechanism, we detected a difference between the two trauma scores; both ISS and RTS also had statistical significance. The results were found for ISS [penetrant (6.56±6.47) versus blunt (2.45±8.68) (p=0.002)] and for RTS [penetrant (7.41±0.54) versus blunt (7.74±0.79) (p=0.001)]. After the final statistics with logistic linear regression, the respiratory rate was statistically significant for penetrant injury [AOR 0.22 (0.001, 0.47) (p≤0.05)]. In the detailed subanalysis for RTS score components, respiratory rate was also significant in moderate traumas [AOR 0.22 (0.001, 0.47) (p=0.004)].ConclusionBoth ISS and RTS are nonsignificant in all moderate injury types. On the other hand, respiratory rate is an important marker, especially in penetrant moderate injuries.

20 keywords...

hide…