Shah Sheerin, Verma Renu, Mittal Rajinder K, Garg Ramneesh
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, DMCH, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.
Int J Appl Basic Med Res. 2024 Jan-Mar;14(1):7-11. doi: 10.4103/ijabmr.ijabmr_350_23. Epub 2024 Feb 20.
Burns is one of the leading causes of mortality in developing countries like India. Most of the major burns requiring hospital care are not triaged adequately for the use of medical resources. An efficient mortality predicting scale would not only help in better care to those who will benefit the most but also make it easy to explain to patient's attendants. Among the various tools, revised Baux (rBaux) and modified Abbreviated Burn Severity Index (ABSI) are two most commonly used scales in developed nations. We proposed this study to analyze the reliability of these two scoring scales in our burn population.
This study aimed to retrospectively study the two scoring systems and analyze them for their reliability in predicting mortality compared to actual observed mortality in each case.
This study was conducted on all burn patients admitted to the intensive care unit of our hospital. Data on their demographic profile, total burn surface area, thickness of burns, inhalational injury, and other comorbidities were collected from files. rBaux and modified ABSI (mABSI) were calculated. The end result in the form of survival or nonsurvival was also recorded. Appropriate statistical analysis using Mann-Whitney -test, Chi-square test, and receiver operator characteristic curve was done to look for a better scoring system out of the two.
A total of 504 patients were included in the study, out of which 337 were survivors. Female gender was not a risk factor for mortality in our study. The median rBaux score in the survivor group was 100 (80-110) and in nonsurvivor group was 111 (103-123). The median mABSI score in the survivor group was 8 (7-9) and in nonsurvivor group was 10 (9-11). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve shows mABSI having better specificity for predicting mortality. rBAUX, though more sensitive, overestimates mortality than actual observed mortality.
mABSI predicts mortality better than rBaux. A multicentric prospective study is recommended for mABSI to be used as a standard mortality predictor in burns in India.
在印度等发展中国家,烧伤是主要的致死原因之一。大多数需要住院治疗的重度烧伤患者在医疗资源使用方面未得到充分分诊。一个有效的死亡率预测量表不仅有助于为受益最大的患者提供更好的护理,也便于向患者家属解释。在各种工具中,修订版博克斯(rBaux)和改良版简化烧伤严重程度指数(ABSI)是发达国家最常用的两个量表。我们开展本研究以分析这两个评分量表在我国烧伤患者群体中的可靠性。
本研究旨在回顾性研究这两种评分系统,并分析它们与每个病例实际观察到的死亡率相比在预测死亡率方面的可靠性。
本研究针对我院重症监护病房收治的所有烧伤患者进行。从病历中收集他们的人口统计学资料、烧伤总面积、烧伤深度、吸入性损伤及其他合并症的数据。计算rBaux和改良ABSI(mABSI)。以存活或未存活形式记录最终结果。使用曼-惠特尼检验、卡方检验和受试者工作特征曲线进行适当的统计分析,以从这两种量表中找出更好的评分系统。
本研究共纳入504例患者,其中337例存活。在我们的研究中,女性并非死亡风险因素。存活组的rBaux评分中位数为100(80 - 110),非存活组为111(103 - 123)。存活组的mABSI评分中位数为8(7 - 9),非存活组为10(9 - 11)。受试者工作特征曲线下面积显示mABSI在预测死亡率方面具有更好的特异性。rBAUX虽然更敏感,但比实际观察到的死亡率高估了死亡率。
mABSI在预测死亡率方面优于rBaux。建议开展多中心前瞻性研究,以使mABSI用作印度烧伤患者的标准死亡率预测指标。