Sut Rumeysa, Az Adem, Cakmak Sumeyye, Sogut Ozgur
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkiye.
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Bakirkoy Dr.Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkiye.
North Clin Istanb. 2023 Nov 3;10(6):711-717. doi: 10.14744/nci.2022.65785. eCollection 2023.
We compared the 15-variable trauma-specific frailty index and traditional injury scoring systems to determine trauma severity and predict discharge disposition in geriatric trauma patients based on the old and new World Health Organization age classifications.
This prospective, observational, single-center study included geriatric patients aged ≥65 years with blunt trauma. We categorized patients as elderly based on the old or new World Health Organization age classification into group I (aged 65-79 years) and group II (aged ≥a80 years), respectively. At admission, we used traditional injury scoring systems (e.g., the Glasgow coma scale, injury severity score, and revised trauma score) to determine trauma severity. We compared the Trauma-Specific Frailty Index and traditional injury scoring systems between the patient groups and evaluated them for correlations.
We included 169 geriatric patients (80 and 89 in groups I and II, respectively). The mean Trauma-Specific Frailty Index score was significantly higher among females than males (p=0.025) and group II than group I (p=0.021). No significant correlations were observed in terms of the Trauma-Specific Frailty Index and traditional injury scoring systems in both groups. The mean Trauma-Specific Frailty Index score was significantly different between the hospitalized and discharged patients in group I (p=0.005), but not in group II (p=0.526).
The 15-variable Trauma-Specific Frailty Index score is superior to traditional injury scoring systems for managing and predicting discharge disposition in geriatric trauma patients aged 65-79 years.
我们比较了15变量创伤特异性衰弱指数和传统损伤评分系统,以根据世界卫生组织新旧年龄分类来确定老年创伤患者的创伤严重程度并预测出院结局。
这项前瞻性、观察性、单中心研究纳入了年龄≥65岁的钝性创伤老年患者。我们根据世界卫生组织的旧或新年龄分类将患者分为两组,分别为I组(65 - 79岁)和II组(≥80岁)。入院时,我们使用传统损伤评分系统(如格拉斯哥昏迷量表、损伤严重程度评分和修订创伤评分)来确定创伤严重程度。我们比较了两组患者的创伤特异性衰弱指数和传统损伤评分系统,并评估它们之间的相关性。
我们纳入了169例老年患者(I组和II组分别为80例和89例)。女性的创伤特异性衰弱指数平均得分显著高于男性(p = 0.025),II组高于I组(p = 0.021)。两组中创伤特异性衰弱指数与传统损伤评分系统之间均未观察到显著相关性。I组中住院患者和出院患者的创伤特异性衰弱指数平均得分有显著差异(p = 0.005),但II组中无显著差异(p = 0.526)。
对于管理和预测65 - 79岁老年创伤患者的出院结局,15变量创伤特异性衰弱指数评分优于传统损伤评分系统。