Suppr超能文献

损伤严重度评分:早期临床诊断与出院诊断的比较

Injury severity scoring: a comparison of early clinical versus discharge diagnosis.

作者信息

Smejkal R, Civil I, Unkle D, Ross S E

机构信息

Department of Surgery, UMDNJ/Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Camden.

出版信息

Accid Anal Prev. 1989 Aug;21(4):386-9. doi: 10.1016/0001-4575(89)90031-6.

Abstract

The Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) and the Injury Severity Score (ISS) are objective means of assessing injury. Accepted methodology involves retrospective scoring of injury based on discharge diagnoses. Recently, early clinical scoring, supplemented by review at discharge, has been introduced. A prospective study was instituted to compare these methodologies. Four hundred sixty consecutive victims of blunt trauma were scored using both clinical and retrospective methodologies by independent, blinded observers. Of these, 333 patients had a change in ISS, 174 with a change of greater than four points. The population mean ISS remained unchanged; however, paired values were significantly different (p less than .03). We conclude that either methodology is applicable for studies of large populations of trauma victims. When accurate individual AIS or ISS scoring is required, the clinical method combined with discharge review is most appropriate.

摘要

简明损伤定级标准(AIS)和损伤严重度评分(ISS)是评估损伤的客观方法。公认的方法是根据出院诊断对损伤进行回顾性评分。最近,引入了早期临床评分,并在出院时进行复查作为补充。开展了一项前瞻性研究以比较这些方法。由独立的、不知情的观察者使用临床和回顾性方法对460例连续钝性创伤受害者进行评分。其中,333例患者的ISS有变化,174例变化大于4分。总体平均ISS保持不变;然而,配对值有显著差异(p小于0.03)。我们得出结论,两种方法均可用于对大量创伤受害者的研究。当需要准确的个体AIS或ISS评分时,临床方法结合出院复查最为合适。

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