Yost Mark T, Carvalho Melissa M, Mbuh Lidwine, Dissak-Delon Fanny N, Oke Rasheedat, Guidam Debora, Nlong Rene M, Zikirou Mbengawoh M, Mekolo David, Banaken Louis H, Juillard Catherine, Chichom-Mefire Alain, Christie S Ariane
Department of Surgery, Program for the Advancement of Surgical Equity, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Buea, Buea, Cameroon.
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2023 Mar 29;3(3):e0001761. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001761. eCollection 2023.
Mortality prediction aids clinical decision-making and is necessary for trauma quality improvement initiatives. Conventional injury severity scores are often not feasible in low-resource settings. We hypothesize that clinician assessment will be more feasible and have comparable discrimination of mortality compared to conventional scores in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).
Between 2017 and 2019, injury data were collected from all injured patients as part of a prospective, four-hospital trauma registry in Cameroon. Clinicians used physical exam at presentation to assign a highest estimated abbreviated injury scale (HEAIS) for each patient. Discrimination of hospital mortality was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curves. Discrimination of HEAIS was compared with conventional scores. Data missingness for each score was reported.
Of 9,635 presenting with injuries, there were 206 in-hospital deaths (2.2%). Compared to 97.5% of patients with HEAIS scores, only 33.2% had sufficient data to calculate a Revised Trauma Score (RTS) and 24.8% had data to calculate a Kampala Trauma Score (KTS). Data from 2,328 patients with all scores was used to compare models. Although statistically inferior to the prediction generated by RTS (AUC 0.92-0.98) and KTS (AUC 0.93-0.99), HEAIS provided excellent overall discrimination of mortality (AUC 0.84-0.92). Among 9,269 patients with HEAIS scores was strongly predictive of mortality (AUC 0.93-0.96).
Clinical assessment of injury severity using HEAIS strongly predicts hospital mortality and far exceeds conventional scores in feasibility. In contexts where traditional scoring systems are not feasible, utilization of HEAIS could facilitate improved data quality and expand access to quality improvement programming.
死亡率预测有助于临床决策,对于创伤质量改进计划至关重要。传统的损伤严重程度评分在资源匮乏地区往往不可行。我们假设,在低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs),与传统评分相比,临床医生评估将更可行,且对死亡率具有可比的区分能力。
2017年至2019年期间,作为喀麦隆一项前瞻性四院创伤登记的一部分,收集了所有受伤患者的损伤数据。临床医生在患者就诊时通过体格检查为每位患者指定最高估计简略损伤量表(HEAIS)。使用受试者工作特征曲线评估医院死亡率的区分能力。将HEAIS的区分能力与传统评分进行比较。报告每个评分的数据缺失情况。
在9635名受伤患者中,有206例住院死亡(2.2%)。与97.5%有HEAIS评分的患者相比,只有33.2%的患者有足够数据来计算修订创伤评分(RTS),24.8%的患者有数据来计算坎帕拉创伤评分(KTS)。来自2328名有所有评分的患者的数据用于比较模型。尽管在统计学上不如RTS(AUC 0.92 - 0.98)和KTS(AUC 0.93 - 0.99)产生的预测,但HEAIS对死亡率提供了出色的总体区分能力(AUC 0.84 - 0.92)。在9269名有HEAIS评分的患者中,对死亡率有很强的预测能力(AUC 0.93 - 0.96)。
使用HEAIS对损伤严重程度进行临床评估能强烈预测医院死亡率,且在可行性方面远超传统评分。在传统评分系统不可行的情况下,使用HEAIS有助于提高数据质量,并扩大获得质量改进计划的机会。