2005 年和 2008 年简明损伤定级标准版本之间的差异和出入——是时候标准化了。
Differences and discrepancies between 2005 and 2008 Abbreviated Injury Scale versions - time to standardise.
机构信息
Department of Research, Norwegian Air Ambulance Foundation, P.O. Box 94, N-1441 Drøbak, Norway.
出版信息
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2012 Feb 2;20:11. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-20-11.
Abstract
The aim of this letter is to facilitate the standardisation of Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) codesets used to code injuries in trauma registries. We have compiled a definitive list of the changes which have been implemented between the AIS 2005 and Update 2008 versions. While the AIS 2008 codeset appears to have remained consistent since its release, we have identified discrepancies between the codesets in copies of AIS 2005 dictionaries. As a result, we recommend that use of the AIS 2005 should be discontinued in favour of the Update 2008 version.
摘要
这封信的目的是促进创伤登记处用于编码损伤的简略损伤分级（AIS）代码集的标准化。我们已经编制了一个明确的清单，列出了在 AIS 2005 版和更新 2008 版之间实施的更改。虽然 AIS 2008 代码集自发布以来似乎一直保持一致，但我们在 AIS 2005 字典的副本中发现了代码集之间的差异。因此，我们建议停止使用 AIS 2005，转而使用更新 2008 版。
相似文献
1
Differences and discrepancies between 2005 and 2008 Abbreviated Injury Scale versions - time to standardise.2005 年和 2008 年简明损伤定级标准版本之间的差异和出入——是时候标准化了。
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2012 Feb 2;20:11. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-20-11.
2
Mapping Abbreviated Injury Scale data from 1990 to 1998 versions: a stepping-stone in the contemporary evaluation of trauma.从 1990 年到 1998 年版本的损伤严重度评分数据映射：当代创伤评估的垫脚石。
Injury. 2013 Nov;44(11):1437-42. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2012.08.033. Epub 2012 Sep 14.
3
Impact of Adapting the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS)-2005 from AIS-1998 on Injury Severity Scores and Clinical Outcome.适应 AIS-2005 对伤害严重程度评分和临床结果的影响。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Dec 10;16(24):5033. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16245033.
4
Changing to AIS 2005 and agreement of injury severity scores in a trauma registry with scores based on manual chart review.改为 AIS 2005 和基于手工图表审查的创伤登记处损伤严重程度评分的协议。
Injury. 2011 Sep;42(9):934-9. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.05.033. Epub 2010 Jul 2.
5
Assessment of the effects and limitations of the 1998 to 2008 Abbreviated Injury Scale map using a large population-based dataset.利用大型基于人群的数据集评估 1998 年至 2008 年简略损伤量表图的效果和局限性。
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2011 Jan 7;19(1):1. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-19-1.
6
Accuracy and reliability of injury coding in the national Dutch Trauma Registry.荷兰国家创伤登记处伤害编码的准确性和可靠性。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2021 Mar 11;33(1). doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzab041.
7
Validation of a modified table to map the 1998 Abbreviated Injury Scale to the 2008 scale and the use of adjusted severities.一种用于将1998年简略损伤量表映射到2008年量表并使用调整后严重程度的改良表格的验证。
J Trauma. 2011 Dec;71(6):1829-34. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31823cc5c5.
8
Injury coding in a national trauma registry: a one-year validation audit in a level 1 trauma centre.国家创伤登记处的损伤编码：在一级创伤中心进行的为期一年的验证审核
BMC Emerg Med. 2019 Oct 30;19(1):61. doi: 10.1186/s12873-019-0276-8.
9
Development and validation of a complementary map to enhance the existing 1998 to 2008 Abbreviated Injury Scale map.开发和验证补充映射以增强现有的 1998 年至 2008 年简略损伤量表图。
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2011 May 8;19:29. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-19-29.
10
Double coding and mapping using Abbreviated Injury Scale 1998 and 2005: identifying issues for trauma data.双重编码和映射使用 1998 年和 2005 年的简明损伤定级标准：确定创伤数据的问题。
Injury. 2010 Sep;41(9):948-54. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2009.12.016. Epub 2010 Jan 13.
引用本文的文献
1
Injury Severity Scoring in the Resuscitation Room-Is Preliminary Injury Severity Score Accurate?复苏室中的损伤严重程度评分——初始损伤严重程度评分准确吗？
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2025 Jul;69(6):e70076. doi: 10.1111/aas.70076.
2
Inter-rater reliability of the Abbreviated Injury Scale scores in patients with severe head injury shows good inter-rater agreement but variability between countries. An inter-country comparison study.严重头部损伤患者损伤严重程度分类评分的观察者间信度显示出较好的观察者间一致性，但国家间存在差异。一项国家间比较研究。
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2023 Jun;49(3):1183-1188. doi: 10.1007/s00068-022-02059-x. Epub 2022 Aug 16.
3
Survival among patients with severe high cervical spine injuries - a TraumaRegister DGU® database study.严重高颈椎损伤患者的生存情况——创伤登记处 DGU®数据库研究。
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2021 Jan 6;29(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s13049-020-00820-y.
4
Impact of Adapting the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS)-2005 from AIS-1998 on Injury Severity Scores and Clinical Outcome.适应 AIS-2005 对伤害严重程度评分和临床结果的影响。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Dec 10;16(24):5033. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16245033.
5
Success Of An Expedited Emergency Department Triage Evaluation System For Geriatric Trauma Patients Not Meeting Trauma Activation Criteria.针对未达创伤激活标准的老年创伤患者的急诊快速分诊评估系统的成效
Open Access Emerg Med. 2019 Oct 29;11:241-247. doi: 10.2147/OAEM.S212617. eCollection 2019.
6
A feasibility study of 60 consecutive patients operated for unstable thoracic cage.对60例因胸廓不稳定接受手术的连续患者进行的可行性研究。
J Trauma Manag Outcomes. 2014 Dec 30;8(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s13032-014-0020-z. eCollection 2014.
本文引用的文献
1
Impact of the version of the abbreviated injury scale on injury severity characterization and quality assessment of trauma care.简明损伤定级标准版本对创伤严重程度特征描述及创伤护理质量评估的影响
J Trauma. 2011 Jul;71(1):56-62. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31821e5a25.
2
Double coding and mapping using Abbreviated Injury Scale 1998 and 2005: identifying issues for trauma data.双重编码和映射使用 1998 年和 2005 年的简明损伤定级标准：确定创伤数据的问题。
Injury. 2010 Sep;41(9):948-54. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2009.12.016. Epub 2010 Jan 13.
3
Scoring of anatomic injury after trauma: AIS 98 versus AIS 90--do the changes affect overall severity assessment?创伤后解剖损伤评分：AIS 98与AIS 90——这些变化会影响总体严重程度评估吗？
Injury. 2007 Jan;38(1):84-90. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2006.04.123. Epub 2006 Jul 26.
4
A modification of the injury severity score that both improves accuracy and simplifies scoring.一种对损伤严重程度评分的改进，既能提高准确性又能简化评分。
J Trauma. 1997 Dec;43(6):922-5; discussion 925-6. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199712000-00009.
Zotero 插件