Suppr超能文献

使用国际疾病分类第10版开发和验证超额死亡率调整后的损伤严重程度评分

Development and validation of the Excess Mortality Ratio-adjusted Injury Severity Score Using the International Classification of Diseases 10th Edition.

作者信息

Kim Jaiyong, Shin Sang Do, Im Tai Ho, Ko Sang Back, Park Ju Ok, Ahn Ki Ok, Song Kyoung Jun

出版信息

Acad Emerg Med. 2009 May;16(5):454-464. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00412.x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to develop and validate a new method for measuring injury severity, the excess mortality ratio-adjusted Injury Severity Score (EMR-ISS), using the International Classification of Diseases 10th Edition (ICD-10).

METHODS

An injury severity grade similar to the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) was converted from the ICD-10 codes on the basis of quintiles of the EMR for each ICD-10 code. Like the New Injury Severity Score (NISS), the EMR-ISS was calculated from three maximum severity grades using data from the Korean National Injury Database. The EMR-ISS was then validated using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit chi-square (HL chi-square, with lower values preferable), the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), and the Pearson correlation coefficient to compare it with the International Classification of Diseases 9th Edition-based Injury Severity Score (ICISS). Nationwide hospital discharge abstract data (DAD) from stratified-sample general hospitals (n = 150) in 2004 were used for an external validation.

RESULTS

The total number of study subjects was 29,282,531, with five subgroups of particular interest identified for further study: traumatic brain injury (TBI, n = 3,768,670), traumatic chest injury (TCI,n = 1,169,828), poisoning (n = 251,565), burns (n = 869,020), and DAD (n = 26,374). The HL chi-square was lower for EMR-ISS than for ICISS in all groups: 42,410.8 versus 55,721.9 in total injury, 7,139.6 versus 20,653.9 in TBI, 6,603.3 versus 4,531.8 in TCI, 2,741.2 versus 9,112.0 in poisoning, 764.4 versus 4,532.1 in burns, and 28.1 versus 49.4 in DAD. The AUC-ROC for death was greater for EMR-ISS than for ICISS: 0.920 versus 0.728 in total injury, 0.907 versus 0.898 in TBI, 0.675 versus 0.799 in TCI, 0.857 versus 0.900 in poisoning, 0.735 versus 0.682 in burns, and 0.850 versus 0.876 in DAD. The Pearson correlation coefficient between the two scores was )0.68 in total injury, )0.76 in TBI, )0.86 in TCI, )0.69 in poisoning,)0.58 in burns, and )0.75 in DAD.

CONCLUSIONS

The EMR-ISS showed better calibration and discrimination power for prediction of death than the ICISS in most injury groups. The EMR-ISS appears to be a feasible tool for passive injury surveillance of large data sets, such as insurance data sets or community injury registries containing diagnosis codes. Additional further studies for external validation on prospectively collected data sets should be considered.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在开发并验证一种新的损伤严重程度测量方法,即使用国际疾病分类第十版(ICD - 10)的超额死亡率调整损伤严重程度评分(EMR - ISS)。

方法

基于每个ICD - 10编码的EMR五分位数,从ICD - 10编码转换出类似于简略损伤量表(AIS)的损伤严重程度等级。与新损伤严重程度评分(NISS)类似,EMR - ISS使用韩国国家损伤数据库的数据,根据三个最高严重程度等级计算得出。然后,使用Hosmer - Lemeshow拟合优度卡方检验(HL卡方,值越低越好)、受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC - ROC)以及Pearson相关系数对EMR - ISS进行验证,以将其与基于国际疾病分类第九版的损伤严重程度评分(ICISS)进行比较。2004年来自分层抽样综合医院(n = 150)的全国医院出院摘要数据(DAD)用于外部验证。

结果

研究对象总数为29,282,531,确定了五个特别感兴趣的亚组以供进一步研究:创伤性脑损伤(TBI,n = 3,768,670)、创伤性胸部损伤(TCI,n = 1,169,828)、中毒(n = 251,565)、烧伤(n = 869,020)和DAD(n = 26,374)。在所有组中,EMR - ISS的HL卡方值均低于ICISS:总损伤中分别为42,410.8和55,721.9;TBI中分别为7,139.6和20,653.9;TCI中分别为6,603.3和4,531.8;中毒中分别为2,741.2和9,112.0;烧伤中分别为764.4和4,532.1;DAD中分别为28.1和49.4。EMR - ISS预测死亡的AUC - ROC大于ICISS:总损伤中分别为0.920和0.728;TBI中分别为0.907和0.898;TCI中分别为0.675和0.799;中毒中分别为0.857和0.900;烧伤中分别为0.735和0.682;DAD中分别为0.850和0.876。两个评分之间的Pearson相关系数在总损伤中为0.68,TBI中为0.76,TCI中为0.86,中毒中为0.69,烧伤中为0.58,DAD中为0.75。

结论

在大多数损伤组中,与ICISS相比,EMR - ISS在预测死亡方面表现出更好的校准和鉴别能力。EMR - ISS似乎是一种用于对大型数据集(如保险数据集或包含诊断编码的社区损伤登记处)进行被动损伤监测的可行工具。应考虑对前瞻性收集的数据集进行外部验证的更多进一步研究。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验