Department of Emergency Medicine and Surgery, Université Lyon 1 and Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Crit Care Med. 2010 Mar;38(3):831-7. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181cc4a67.
OBJECTIVES: Prehospital triage of trauma patients is of paramount importance because adequate trauma center referral improves survival. We developed a simple score that is easy to calculate in the prehospital phase. DESIGN: Multicenter prospective observational study. SETTING: Prehospital physician-staffed emergency system in university and nonuniversity hospitals. INTERVENTIONS: We evaluated 1360 trauma patients receiving care from a prehospital mobile intensive care unit in 22 centers in France during 2002. The association of prehospital variables with in-hospital death was tested using logistic regression, and a simple score (the Mechanism, Glasgow coma scale, Age, and Arterial Pressure [MGAP] score) was created and compared with the triage Revised Trauma Score, Revised Trauma Score, and Trauma Related Injury Severity Score. The model was validated in 1003 patients from 2003 through 2005. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Four independent variables were identified, and each was assigned a number of points proportional to its regression coefficient to provide the MGAP score: Glasgow Coma Scale (from 3-15 points), blunt trauma (4 points), systolic arterial blood pressure (>120 mm Hg: 5 points, 60 to 120 mm Hg: 3 points), and age <60 yrs (5 points). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of MGAP was not significantly different from that of the triage Revised Trauma Score or Revised Trauma Score, but when sensitivity was fixed >0.95 (undertriage of 0.05), the MGAP score was more specific and accurate than triage Revised Trauma Score and Revised Trauma Score, approaching those of Trauma Related Injury Severity Score. We defined three risk groups: low (23-29 points), intermediate (18-22 points), and high risk (<18 points). In the derivation cohort, the mortality was 2.8%, 15%, and 48%, respectively. Comparable characteristics of the MGAP score were observed in the validation cohort. CONCLUSION: The MGAP score can accurately predict in-hospital death in trauma patients.
目的:创伤患者的院前分诊至关重要,因为充分的创伤中心转诊可提高生存率。我们开发了一种简单的评分方法,便于在院前阶段计算。
设计:多中心前瞻性观察性研究。
地点:在法国的 22 个中心,由院前配备医生的急救系统提供服务。
干预措施:我们评估了 2002 年期间在法国 22 个中心的一个院前移动重症监护病房接受治疗的 1360 名创伤患者。使用逻辑回归测试了院前变量与院内死亡的相关性,并创建了一个简单的评分(机制、格拉斯哥昏迷评分、年龄和动脉压评分[MGAP]),并与创伤修订分类评分、修订创伤评分和创伤相关损伤严重程度评分进行了比较。该模型在 2003 年至 2005 年期间的 1003 名患者中得到验证。
测量和主要结果:确定了四个独立变量,每个变量都根据其回归系数分配一定数量的点,以提供 MGAP 评分:格拉斯哥昏迷评分(3-15 分)、钝性创伤(4 分)、收缩压动脉血压(>120mmHg:5 分,60-120mmHg:3 分)和年龄<60 岁(5 分)。MGAP 的接收器操作特性曲线下面积与修订创伤分类评分或修订创伤评分无显著差异,但当灵敏度固定>0.95(漏诊率为 0.05)时,MGAP 评分比修订创伤分类评分和修订创伤评分更具特异性和准确性,接近创伤相关损伤严重程度评分。我们定义了三个风险组:低危(23-29 分)、中危(18-22 分)和高危(<18 分)。在推导队列中,死亡率分别为 2.8%、15%和 48%。在验证队列中观察到 MGAP 评分的可比特征。
结论:MGAP 评分可准确预测创伤患者的院内死亡。
J Trauma. 2011-9
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2019-1-7
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2025-6-11
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025-4-22
Adv Rehabil Sci Pract. 2025-1-16
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2024-10-8