Clark David E, Qian Jing, Sihler Kristen C, Hallagan Lee D, Betensky Rebecca A
Department of Surgery, Maine Medical Center, 887 Congress Street, Suite 210, Portland, ME 04102, USA.
World J Surg. 2012 Jul;36(7):1562-70. doi: 10.1007/s00268-012-1549-5.
The distribution of survival times after injury has been described as "trimodal," but several studies have not confirmed this. The purpose of this study was to clarify the distribution of survival times after injury.
We defined survival time (t(s)) as the interval between injury time and declared death time. We constructed histograms for t(s) ≤ 150 min from the 2004-2007 Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS, for traffic crashes) and National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS, for homicides). We estimated statistical models in which death times known only within intervals were treated as interval-censored. For confirmation, we also obtained EMS response times (t(r)), prehospital times (t(p)), and hospital times (t(h)) for decedents in the 2008 National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) with t(s) = t(p) + t(h) ≤ 150. We approximated times until circulatory arrest (t(x)) as t(r) for patients pulseless at the injury scene, t(p) for other patients pulseless at hospital admission, and t(s) for the rest; for any declared t(s), we calculated mean t(x)/t(s). We used this ratio to estimate t(x) for hospital deaths in FARS or NVDRS and provide independent support for using interval-censored methods.
FARS and NVDRS deaths were most frequent in the first few minutes. Both showed a second peak at 35-40 min after injury, corresponding to peaks in hospital deaths. Third peaks were not present. Estimated t(x) in FARS and NVDRS did not show second peaks and were similar to estimates treating some death times as interval-censored.
Increases in frequency of survival times at 35-40 min are primarily artifacts created because declaration of death in hospitals is delayed until completing resuscitative attempts. By avoiding these artifacts, interval censoring methods are useful for analysis of injury survival times.
受伤后的生存时间分布被描述为“三峰型”,但多项研究并未证实这一点。本研究的目的是阐明受伤后的生存时间分布情况。
我们将生存时间(t(s))定义为受伤时间与宣告死亡时间之间的间隔。我们根据2004 - 2007年死亡分析报告系统(FARS,用于交通事故)和国家暴力死亡报告系统(NVDRS,用于凶杀案)构建了t(s)≤150分钟的直方图。我们估计了统计模型,其中仅在区间内已知的死亡时间被视为区间删失。为作验证,我们还获取了2008年国家创伤数据库(NTDB)中t(s)=t(p)+t(h)≤150的死者的急救医疗服务响应时间(t(r))、院前时间(t(p))和院内时间(t(h))。对于在受伤现场无脉搏的患者,我们将直至循环停止的时间(t(x))近似为t(r);对于在入院时无脉搏的其他患者,近似为t(p);对于其余患者,近似为t(s);对于任何宣告的t(s),我们计算平均t(x)/t(s)。我们使用该比率来估计FARS或NVDRS中医院死亡的t(x),并为使用区间删失方法提供独立支持。
FARS和NVDRS的死亡在最初几分钟最为频繁。两者均在受伤后35 - 40分钟出现第二个峰值,与医院死亡的峰值相对应。未出现第三个峰值。FARS和NVDRS中估计的t(x)未显示第二个峰值,且与将某些死亡时间视为区间删失的估计相似。
35 - 40分钟时生存时间频率的增加主要是由于医院中死亡宣告延迟至复苏尝试完成而产生的人为现象。通过避免这些人为现象,区间删失方法对于分析受伤后的生存时间很有用。