Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel.
Department of General Surgery, Soroka University Medical Center, Ben- Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel.
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2024 Oct;50(5):2265-2272. doi: 10.1007/s00068-024-02644-2. Epub 2024 Aug 28.
Many trauma patients who are transported to our level I trauma center have minor injuries that do not require full trauma team activation (FTTA). Thus, we implemented a two-tiered TTA system categorizing patients into red and yellow code alerts, indicating FTTA and Limited TTA (LTTA) requirements, respectively. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of this triage tool by evaluating its diagnostic parameters (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), undertriage and overtriage) and comparing injury severity between the two groups.
A retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to a Level I trauma center. Characteristics compared between the red and yellow code groups included demographics, injury severity, treatments, and hospital length of stay (LOS). Calculating the diagnostic parameters was based on Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the need for life-saving surgery or procedures.
Significant differences in injury severity indicators were observed between the two groups. Patients in the red code group had a higher ISS and New Injury Severity Score (NISS), a lower Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and probability of survival. They had a longer hospital LOS, a higher Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission rate and required more emergency operations. The Sensitivity of the triage tool was 85.2%, specificity was 55.6%, PPV was 74.2%, NPV was 71.5%, undertriage was 14.7%, and overtriage was 25.7%.
The two-tiered TTA system effectively distinguish between patients with major trauma who need FTTA and patients with minor trauma who can be managed by LTTA.
许多被送往我们一级创伤中心的创伤患者只有轻微的损伤,不需要全面的创伤团队激活(FTTA)。因此,我们实施了一个两层的 TTA 系统,将患者分为红色和黄色代码警报,分别表示需要 FTTA 和有限 TTA(LTTA)。本研究旨在通过评估其诊断参数(敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)、分诊不足和分诊过度)并比较两组之间的损伤严重程度来评估这种分诊工具的有效性。
对一家一级创伤中心收治的患者进行回顾性队列研究。对红色和黄色代码组之间的特征进行比较,包括人口统计学特征、损伤严重程度、治疗和住院时间(LOS)。根据损伤严重程度评分(ISS)和是否需要救命手术或程序来计算诊断参数。
两组间的损伤严重程度指标存在显著差异。红色代码组患者的 ISS 和新损伤严重程度评分(NISS)更高,格拉斯哥昏迷评分(GCS)和修订创伤评分(RTS)更低,生存率更高。他们的住院时间更长,重症监护病房(ICU)入院率更高,需要更多的急诊手术。分诊工具的敏感性为 85.2%,特异性为 55.6%,PPV 为 74.2%,NPV 为 71.5%,分诊不足为 14.7%,分诊过度为 25.7%。
两层 TTA 系统能够有效区分需要 FTTA 的严重创伤患者和需要 LTTA 管理的轻度创伤患者。