Search

Background: : Despite serious documented limitations, the Trauma Injury Severity Score (TRISS) is still used for risk adjustment in trauma system evaluation and clinical research. Several modifications have been proposed to address TRISS limitations. We aimed to assess the impact of proposed TRISS modifications on the accuracy of mortality prediction for blunt trauma., Methods: : The Quebec Trauma Registry (QTR), based on a mature, regionalized trauma system with mandatory participation of all trauma centers as well as standardized inclusion criteria and coding practices, was used to evaluate TRISS modifications. The National Trauma Data Bank was then used to validate our findings. Gains in predictive accuracy were evaluated in logistic regression models of hospital mortality with the area under the receiving operator curve and the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic., Results: : When population-based weights, expanding age, modeling the Glasgow Coma Scale score as a quantitative variable, adding an indicator of comorbid status, and modeling quantitative variables with nonparametric functions to allow the expression of nonlinear relations to mortality were used, all were associated with a significant improvement in model discrimination., Conclusions: : Several modifications that have been proposed to address limitations of the TRISS lead to significant improvements in the accuracy of mortality prediction. This study provides valuable information in the quest to improve trauma mortality modeling.

Background Data: The trauma injury severity score (TRISS) has been used for over 20 years for retrospective risk assessment in trauma populations. The TRISS has serious limitations, which may compromise the validity of trauma care evaluations., Objective: To derive and validate a new mortality prediction model, the trauma risk adjustment model (TRAM), and to compare the performance of the TRAM to that of the TRISS in terms of predictive validity and risk adjustment., Methods: The Quebec Trauma Registry (1998-2005), based on the mandatory participation of 59 designated provincial trauma centers, was used to derive the model. The American National Trauma Data Bank (2000-2005), based on the voluntary participation of any US hospitals treating trauma, was used for the validation phase. Adult patients with blunt trauma respecting at least one of the following criteria were included: hospital stay >2 days, intensive care unit admission, death, or hospital transfer. Hospital mortality was modeled with logistic generalized additive models using cubic smoothing splines to accommodate nonlinear relations to mortality. Predictive validity was assessed with model discrimination and calibration. Risk adjustment was assessed using comparisons of risk-adjusted mortality between hospitals., Results: The TRAM generated an area under the receiving operator curve of 0.944 and a Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic of 42 in the derivation phase. In the validation phase, the TRAM demonstrated better model discrimination and calibration than the TRISS (area under the receiving operator curve = 0.942 and 0.928, P < 0.001; Hosmer-Lemeshow statistics = 127 and 256, respectively). Replacing the TRISS with the TRAM led to a mean change of 28% in hospital risk-adjusted odds ratios of mortality., Conclusions: Our results suggest that adopting the TRAM could improve the validity of trauma care evaluations and trauma outcome research.

Study Objective: Preexisting conditions have been found to be an independent predictor of mortality after trauma. However, no consensus has been reached as to what indicator of preexisting condition status should be used, and the contribution of preexisting conditions to mortality prediction models is unclear. This study aims to identify the most accurate way to model preexisting condition status to predict inhospital trauma mortality and to evaluate the potential gain of adding preexisting condition status to a standard trauma mortality prediction model., Methods: The study comprised all patients from the trauma registries of 4 Level I trauma centers. Information provided by individual preexisting conditions was compared to 3 commonly used summary measures: (1) absence/presence of any preexisting condition, (2) number of preexisting conditions, and (3) Charlson Comorbidity Index. The impact of adding preexisting condition status to 2 baseline risk models, the current standard Trauma and Injury Severity Score model and an improved model based on nonparametric transformations of quantitative variables, was evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve., Results: Discrimination for predicting mortality in the improved model was as follows: baseline risk model: area under the receiver operating characteristics curve=0.935; baseline risk model+individually modeled preexisting conditions: area under the receiver operating characteristics curve=0.941; baseline risk model+presence of any preexisting condition: area under the receiver operating characteristics curve=0.937; baseline risk model+number of preexisting conditions: area under the receiver operating characteristics curve=0.939; baseline risk model+Charlson Comorbidity Index: area under the receiver operating characteristics curve=0.938., Conclusion: Preexisting condition status is an independent predictor of mortality from trauma that provides a modest improvement in mortality prediction. The total number of preexisting conditions is a good summary measure of preexisting condition status. The Charlson Comorbidity Index is no better than the total number of preexisting conditions and is therefore not recommended for use in trauma mortality modeling.

Background: This study was designed to show the importance of age, presence of premorbid conditions, and the type of injury on time and location of adult inhospital trauma mortality., Methods: All acute blunt trauma deaths at a Level I urban trauma center between April 1, 1993 and March 31, 2003 were individually reviewed to collect data on the following variables: age, gender, presence and number of premorbid conditions, mechanisms of trauma, location of death, acute transfer from another hospital, delay to death, initial Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS), Injury Severity Score (ISS), and revised trauma score (RTS). Bivariate analysis using simple logistic regression was used to show the association between each variable and delay to death. Variables significantly associated with death underwent multivariate analysis to yield adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence interval (CI)., Results: During the study period there were 463 blunt trauma deaths (6.8%). Their mean age was 67.5 years, mean ISS was 22.6, mean GCS was 11.0, and 55.3% were male. Most deaths occurred in either the intensive care unit (45.8%) or the ward (46.4%); there were few deaths in the emergency department (6.8%) or the operating room (0.4%). The following were significant bivariate predictors for death: presence of premorbid conditions, number of premorbid conditions, age >60, pulmonary diseases, cardiac diseases, diabetes mellitus, neurologic diseases, GCS, AIS > or =4, and ISS. Multivariate analysis demonstrated the following significant findings: patients with severe thoracic injuries were significantly more likely to die in the first 6 hours (aOR = 1.37; CI = 1.12-1.68; p = 0.002); and patients with severe head injuries were more likely to die after 48 hours (aOR = 1.275; CI = 1.158-1.405; p = 0.0001). Older patients and those with neurologic diseases were more likely to die later and in a hospital ward (aOR = 2.18; CI = 1.25-3.81; p = 0.006). Men and women differed as to age, ISS, mechanism of injury, and type of injury, but not as to delay to death., Conclusions: Age, body area injured, and presence and type of premorbid conditions are significant predictors of location of and delay to death after blunt trauma. We think that incorporating information on premorbid conditions is essential for mortality analysis in an aging population.

Background: Trauma care of thoracic and abdominal injuries is currently in turmoil because of both a decrease in the number of these injuries and a concomitant increase in their nonsurgical management. The goal of this study was to evaluate the incidence of thoracic and abdominal injuries in the province of Quebec and the number of associated surgical procedures., Methods: Patients with blunt thoracic or abdominal injuries taken to a tertiary trauma center in the province of Quebec from April 1, 1998 to March 31, 2002 were identified. Patients who were dead on arrival were excluded. Only patients with an Abbreviated Injury Scale score > or =2 for the thoracic or abdominal regions were included., Results: During the study period, a total of 16,430 blunt trauma patients were admitted to one of the four trauma centers. A total of 2,660 (16.2%) patients sustained thoracic and/or abdominal injuries with an Abbreviated Injury Scale score >1. Among these, the median Injury Severity Score was 24 (range: 4-75) and the in-hospital mortality rate was 11.0%. There were 2,196 patients (82.5%) with thoracic injuries, 977 patients (36.7%) with abdominal injuries, and 520 patients (19.5%) with injuries to both regions. A surgical intervention was undertaken in 76 patients with thoracic injuries (3.5%) and in 414 patients with abdominal injuries (42.3%). On average, 4.7 thoracic and 28.8 abdominal trauma procedures were performed per center, yearly. Each trauma surgeon performed, on average, less than one thoracic and less than five abdominal trauma procedures yearly., Conclusions: The incidence of blunt thoracic and abdominal injuries needing surgical intervention is low in Quebec tertiary trauma centers. The competence of general surgeons in trauma-related procedures might be compromised by such low patient volume unless they frequently perform non-trauma surgical procedures. We think that in Quebec, trauma care must be provided by surgeons who practice both acute emergency and elective surgical care in addition to trauma care. These findings should have an important impact on the development of on-going education and resident training programs.

Background: The Revised Trauma Score (RTS) calculated with Major Outcome Trauma Study weights (MTOS-RTS) is currently the standard physiologic severity score in trauma research and quality control. It is often confused with the Triage-RTS (T-RTS), a version that is easier to calculate but only intended for clinical triage., Objectives: To compare the accuracy of the MTOS-RTS to the RTS calculated with weights derived from the study population (POP-RTS) and the T-RTS, for predicting mortality in a trauma population., Methods: The study population consists of 22,388 patients, drawn from the trauma registries of three Level I trauma centers. The predictive accuracy of the MTOS-RTS, POP-RTS, and the T-RTS were compared using measures of discrimination and model fit from logistic regression models., Results: The MTOS-RTS, the POP-RTS, and the T-RTS had the same discrimination (Area under the Receiver Operating Curve [AUC] = 0.841). The POP-RTS and the T-RTS had a slightly better model fit than the MTOS-RTS (AIC = 8010, 8010, and 8067, respectively). The T-RTS had equal discrimination and equal or better model fit than the MTOS-RTS in the whole sample, in each of the three trauma centers and in the population of patients with severe head trauma. The T-RTS was also equivalent to the POP-RTS in all of these population sub-groups., Conclusions: The T-RTS could replace the MTOS-RTS as the standard physiologic severity score for trauma outcome prediction. The advantages of using the T-RTS over the MTOS-RTS are ease of calculation, the need for only one measure for triage and mortality prediction purposes and universal adaptation to a broad range of trauma populations.

Background: To validate the predictive value of the Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) and find the best way to model the score in a logistic regression model predicting mortality., Methods: Analyses were based on 20,494 patients from the trauma registries of three urban Level I trauma centers in the province of Quebec, Canada. The predictive value of the GCS and its components was evaluated in logistic regression models predicting in-hospital mortality with measures of discrimination and calibration. The performance of the GCS with no transformation and as an ordered categorical variable was compared with two transformation techniques: fractional polynomials and spline regression., Results: The GCS had excellent discrimination (area under Receiving Operator Characteristic Curve=0.833 95% confidence interval=0.820-0.846) but fairly poor calibration (Pearson's Chi-squared statistic=122 on 11 df). The eye component added no predictive information to the verbal and motor components in the whole sample but was important in certain sub-populations. Using the three components separately, rather than the sum, did not improve the predictive model. Fractional polynomial transformation of the GCS improved calibration and spline regression performed even better. GCS modeled as an ordered categorical variable performed badly both in terms of discrimination and calibration., Conclusions: The GCS in its present form is an efficient predictor of in-hospital mortality, which could benefit from statistical transformation in logistic regression models when the accuracy of estimated probabilities of mortality is important. The common use of GCS categories for modeling mortality leads to loss of information and should be discarded.

Background: The Injury Severity Score (ISS) accounts for only one injury in each body region. The New Injury Severity Score (NISS) considers all injuries in a body region. Despite a big difference between the two scores in patients with multiple injuries, the NISS does not offer significant improvement in mortality prediction. This paper hypothesizes that two injuries in different body regions are associated with higher mortality than two injuries in the same body region, independently of injury severity., Methods: The population consisted of 15,200 patients with two or more injuries from the Quebec Trauma Registry, Canada, abstracted between 1998 and 2004. The two worst injuries were considered. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the mortality odds ratio of having two worst injuries in different body regions (DR) compared with two worst injuries in the same body region (SR), while adjusting for the severity and the body region of the two worst injuries and age., Results: A total of 5,869 patients (49%) had their worst injuries in DR. DR patients had 75% higher risk of mortality than SR patients (odds ratio = 1.75, 95% confidence interval = 1.42-2.15)., Conclusion: After accounting for differing injury severity, patients with their two worst injuries in different body regions have higher mortality than those with their two worst injuries in the same region. Results suggest that the observed effect is not due to a foible in the Abbreviated Injury Scale system but rather to physiologic, clinical, or organizational elements. The results of this study should be considered in the development of future injury severity instruments and may have implications for the care of patients with multiple injuries.

Background: To validate the accuracy of the Revised Trauma Score (RTS) and its components for predicting in-hospital mortality., Methods: Analyses were based on 22,388 patients from the trauma registries of three urban Level I trauma centers in the province of Quebec, Canada. The accuracy of RTS coded variables for the Glasgow Coma Score (GCSc), Systolic Blood Pressure (SBPc), and Respiratory Rate (RRc) for predicting mortality was evaluated in logistic regression models with measures of discrimination and model fit and compared with Fractional Polynomial (FP) transformations of each component., Results: RTS coded variables were associated with sparse data distributions and did not accurately represent the relation of GCS, SBP, and RR to mortality. FP models were always associated with significantly better discrimination (all p < 0.00001) and model fit. Survival probability estimates generated by the model with FP transformations were significantly different to those generated by the model with RTS-coded variables., Conclusions: The RTS in its present form does not accurately describe the relation of GCS, SBP, and RR to mortality. FP transformation would improve the accuracy of predicted survival probabilities used for performance evaluation and may improve control of confounding caused by of physiologic severity case mix in trauma research.

Background: The goal of this study was to evaluate the burden of falls in the elderly in a Canadian tertiary trauma center., Methods: Patients admitted to Charles-LeMoyne Hospital with a low velocity fall (LVF) from April 1, 1993 to March 31, 2000 were individually reviewed. Elderly was defined as age 65 years and older. A region was considered to be injured if Abbreviated Injury Scale was greater than or equal to 2., Results: There were 2,333 patients with LVF, 41.4% of all blunt trauma admissions. Median Injury Severity Score was 9 for elderly compared with 5 for young (p < 0.001). Injuries were significantly more frequent to head, face, thorax, and lower limbs in the elderly. Mortality (13.4% versus 0.9%; p < 0.001), length of stay (median = 15 versus 3 days; p < 0.001) and long-term care facility reference (19.3% versus 1.1%, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the elderly., Conclusions: LVF is a frequent cause of admission for trauma in the elderly. Despite the apparent benign nature of the mechanism, LVF is associated with more severe injuries and worse outcome.

We aimed to compare the predictive accuracy of consensus-derived and data-derived injury severity scores when considered alone and in combination with age and physiological status. Analyses were based on 25,111 patients. The predictive validity of each severity score was evaluated in logistic regression models predicting in-hospital mortality using measures of discrimination and calibration. Data-derived scores had consistently better predictive accuracy than consensus-derived scores in univariate models (p<0.0001) but very little difference between scores was observed in models including information on age and physiological status. Data-derived scores provide more accurate mortality prediction than consensus-derived scores when only anatomic injury severity is considered but offer little advantage if age and physiological status are taken into account.

Background: The frequency of penetrating trauma is low in Canada. Current recommendations for the care of patients with penetrating injuries originate from inner city trauma centres with a high volume of such injuries and may not apply to Canada. The purpose of this study was to review the incidence and treatment of penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries in the 4 tertiary trauma centres in Quebec., Methods: We identified all patients with penetrating thoracic or abdominal injuries who were taken to any of the 4 tertiary trauma centres in the province of Quebec between Apr. 1, 1998, and Mar. 31, 2001. Patients who were dead on arrival were excluded. Only patients with an Abbreviated Injury Scale of 2 or greater for the thoracic or abdominal regions were included., Results: In total, 245 patients meeting our inclusion criteria were identified. Of these 223 (91%) were male. The mean (and standard deviation) age was 33.8 (13.2) years; range 15-90 years. The median Injury Severity Score was 10 (range 4-75). Overall in-hospital mortality was 6.9%. There were 203 patients (82.8%) with thoracic injuries and 192 patients (78.4%) with abdominal injuries. Fifty (20.4%) of these patients had injuries to both regions. A thoracotomy was carried out in 48 (31.4%) of 153 patients who had injuries to the thorax, and the abdomen was explored in 133 (93.7%) of the 142 patients with abdominal injuries. The incidence of these injuries in the study period varied from 3 to 49 cases per centre., Conclusions: The annual incidence of penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries is extremely low in all 4 of Quebec's tertiary trauma centres, and the number of thoracoabdominal procedures is even lower. Such a low exposure may jeopardize education and clinical competence. We need to rethink our educational strategies both for residents and for continuing medical education. New approaches to training and maintenance of competence must be developed.

Background: Patients with isolated hip fractures are frequently excluded from trauma registries. The goal of this study was to show that patients with these injuries have higher resource use and poorer outcomes than the rest of the trauma population., Methods: The Quebec Trauma Registry was used to identify all trauma patients from April 1, 1998, to March 31, 2003. Patients who were dead on arrival at the emergency room were excluded. Isolated hip fracture (HIP) was defined as a diagnosis of a single fracture to the neck of the femur (Abbreviated Injury Scale 1990 codes 851808.3, 851810.3, 851812.3, and 851818.3) secondary to a fall and for which the Injury Severity Score was 9 or 10 (no other Abbreviated Injury Scale code higher than 1). Patients with all other trauma diagnosis (OT) were used for comparison. Outcome variables were length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, in-hospital complications, and status and orientation at discharge. Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used., Results: There were 68,422 patients: 14,426 (21.1%) HIP patients and 53,996 (78.9%) OT patients. The median Injury Severity Score was 9 for HIP (range, 9-10) and 9 for OT (range, 1-75). Mean length of hospital stay was 18.4 days for HIP compared with 11.7 days for OT (p < 0.0001). HIP patients represented 29.5% of the total hospital stay. ICU stay was required for 1,353 HIP patients (9.4%) and for 12,395 (23.0%) OT patients (p < 0.0001). Mean ICU stay was 3.9 days for HIP compared with 5.5 days for OT (p = 0.0006). In-hospital mortality was 8.5% in HIP compared with 3.7% in OT (p < 0.0001). HIP represented 62.7% of patients referred for long-term care and 39.3% of patients referred to a rehabilitation center., Conclusion: Patients with HIP represented 21.1% of admissions while accounting for 42% of total days of hospitalization and 38% of deaths. Patients with hip fractures have a significantly higher risk of death, prolonged hospital stay, and complication rate, and are more often transferred to a rehabilitation center or to a long-term nursing home than the rest of the trauma population despite lower severity. They require multidisciplinary care typical of the rest of the trauma population and should be included in the trauma registry if the registry is to document the full outcome and resource use of the trauma population.

Hypothesis: A second injury in the same body region is associated with lower mortality than a second injury in a different body region, independently of injury severity and body region., Methods: The population consisted of 15,200 patients with two or more injuries from level I trauma centers in Quebec. The mortality odds ratio of having a same-region second injury (SR) as opposed to a different-region second injury (DR) was assessed., Results: Patients with a SR had 43% lower odds of mortality when compared to patients with a DR., Conclusion: A second injury in the same body region is associated with lower mortality than a second injury in a different body region.

Background: The purpose of this study was to show that blunt diaphragmatic rupture does not require immediate emergency operation in the absence of other indications., Methods: We reviewed all patients with blunt diaphragmatic rupture admitted within 24 hours of injury to one of six university trauma centers providing trauma care for the province of Quebec from April 1, 1984, to March 31, 1999. Multivariate analysis of demographic profiles, severity indices, indications for operation, and preoperative delays was performed., Results: There were 160 patients (91 men and 69 women) with blunt diaphragmatic rupture. Mean age was 40.1 +/- 16.2 years. Mean Injury Severity Score was 26.9 +/- 11.5 and mortality was 14.4%. Patients undergoing emergency surgery for indications other than diaphragmatic rupture had a significantly higher Injury Severity Score than those undergoing surgery for repair of diaphragmatic rupture alone (34.7 +/- 10.7 vs. 22.0 +/- 9.0, p < 0.001). In patients undergoing surgery for diaphragmatic rupture alone, delay before repair of the diaphragmatic hernia did not lead to an increased mortality compared with patients undergoing immediate surgery (3.4% vs. 5.0%, p = NS)., Conclusion: Blunt diaphragmatic rupture in the absence of other surgical injuries carries low mortality. Operative repair of diaphragmatic rupture can be deferred without appreciable increased mortality if no other indication mandates immediate surgery.

The movement towards trauma care regionalization in Québec was initiated in 1990, with formal designation of three level I trauma centers in 1993. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of trauma center designation on mortality. The study design is that of a two-cohort study, one assembled during 1987 when designation was not in effect, and the other during the first 5 months of designation. The study focuses on patients that fulfilled the following criteria: i) arrived alive at the hospital, and ii) were admitted. The outcome measures are adjusted mortality, and excess mortality as measured by the TRISS methodology. A total of 158 patients treated in 1987, and 288 treated in 1993, were identified. The mean age of the patients treated in 1993 was significantly higher (40.0, +/- 18.1), when compared with the 1987 group (30.9 +/- 18.1; p < 0.001). Patients in the 1987 cohort had a significantly higher proportion of injuries caused by stabbing (p = 0.02), and a significantly lower proportion caused by falls (p = 0.003). The 1987 cohort had a higher rate of abdominal injuries (p = 0.0001), and external injuries (p = 0.0001), and a significantly lower rate of head or neck injuries (p = 0.003), and injuries to the extremities (p = 0.0001). The mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) for the 1987 cohort was 14.96 (+/- 12.36), and 15.49 (+/- 11.61) in 1993 (p = 0.65). The crude mortality rate was 20% for 1987, and 10% for 1993. The crude odds ratio for mortality in 1987 was 2.10 with 95% confidence intervals between 1.22 and 3.62 (p = 0.006).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

With the advent of feminist ideology, women believed they could fashion made-to-measure tools to end their oppression and emancipate themselves. However, passing from ideology to practice has led to a certain number of difficulties. On the other hand, the feminist viewpoint has made a major and undeniable contribution to society. This article discusses the trials and tribulations as well as the successes of feminist practice.