Skaga Nils O, Eken Torsten, Hestnes Morten, Jones J Mary, Steen Petter A
Department of Anaesthesiology, Ulleval University Hospital, 0407 Oslo, Norway.
Injury. 2007 Jan;38(1):84-90. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2006.04.123. Epub 2006 Jul 26.
Although several changes were implemented in the 1998 update of the abbreviated injury scale (AIS 98) versus the previous AIS 90, both are still used worldwide for coding of anatomic injury in trauma. This could possibly invalidate comparisons between systems using different AIS versions. Our aim was to evaluate whether the use of different coding dictionaries affected estimation of Injury Severity Score (ISS), New Injury Severity Score (NISS) and probability of survival (Ps) according to TRISS in a hospital-based trauma registry.
In a prospective study including 1654 patients from Ulleval University Hospital, a Norwegian trauma referral centre, patients were coded according to both AIS 98 and AIS 90. Agreement between the classifications of ISS, NISS and Ps according to TRISS methodology was estimated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with 95% CI.
ISS changed for 378 of 1654 patients analysed (22.9%). One hundred and forty seven (8.9%) were coded differently due to different injury descriptions and 369 patients (22.3%) had a change in ISS value in one or more regions due to the different scoring algorithm for skin injuries introduced in AIS 98. This gave a minimal change in mean ISS (14.74 versus 14.54). An ICC value of 0.997 (95% CI 0.9968-0.9974) for ISS indicates excellent agreement between the scoring systems. There were no significant changes in NISS and Ps.
There was excellent agreement for the overall population between ISS, NISS and Ps values obtained using AIS 90 and AIS 98 for injury coding. Injury descriptions for hypothermia were re-introduced in the recently published AIS 2005. We support this change as coding differences due to hypothermia were encountered in 4.3% of patients in the present study.
尽管与之前的AIS 90相比,简明损伤定级标准(AIS 98)在1998年更新时有多项变动,但两者仍在全球范围内用于创伤解剖损伤编码。这可能会使使用不同AIS版本的系统之间的比较无效。我们的目的是评估在一家医院创伤登记处,使用不同编码字典是否会影响根据创伤和损伤严重程度评分(TRISS)法得出的损伤严重程度评分(ISS)、新损伤严重程度评分(NISS)以及生存概率(Ps)的估计。
在一项前瞻性研究中,纳入了来自挪威创伤转诊中心乌勒瓦尔大学医院的1654例患者,患者同时按照AIS 98和AIS 90进行编码。根据TRISS方法,使用组内相关系数(ICC)及95%置信区间(CI)估计ISS、NISS和Ps分类之间的一致性。
在分析的1654例患者中,378例(22.9%)的ISS发生了变化。147例(8.9%)因损伤描述不同而编码不同,369例(22.3%)患者因AIS 98引入的皮肤损伤不同评分算法,导致一个或多个区域的ISS值发生变化。这使得平均ISS的变化极小(14.74对14.54)。ISS的ICC值为0.997(95% CI 0.9968 - 0.9974),表明评分系统之间具有极好的一致性。NISS和Ps没有显著变化。
使用AIS 90和AIS 98进行损伤编码时,总体人群的ISS、NISS和Ps值之间具有极好的一致性。低温的损伤描述在最近发布的AIS 2005中重新引入。我们支持这一变化,因为在本研究中4.3%的患者遇到了因低温导致的编码差异。