首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of trauma >Usefulness of the abbreviated injury score and the injury severity score in comparison to the Glasgow Coma Scale in predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury.
【24h】

Usefulness of the abbreviated injury score and the injury severity score in comparison to the Glasgow Coma Scale in predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury.

机译:与格拉斯哥昏迷量表相比,缩写的伤害评分和伤害严重程度评分在预测脑外伤后的结局方面的作用。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Assessment of injury severity is important in the management of patients with brain trauma. We aimed to analyze the usefulness of the head abbreviated injury score (AIS), the injury severity score (ISS), and the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) as measures of injury severity and predictors of outcome after traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: Data were prospectively collected from 410 patients with TBI. AIS, ISS, and GCS were recorded at admission. Subjects' outcomes after TBI were measured using the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS-E) at 12 months postinjury. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: Outcome information was obtained from 270 patients (66%). ISS was the best predictor of GOS-E (rs -0.341, p < 0.001), followed by GCS score (rs head AIS (rs = -0.222, p < 0.001). When considered in combination, GCS score and ISS modestly improved the correlation with GOS-E (R = 0.335, p < 0.001). The combination of GCS score and head AIS had a similar effect (R 0.275, p < 0.001). Correlations were stronger from patients 8). CONCLUSIONS: GCS score, AIS, and ISS are weakly correlated with 12-month outcome. However, anatomic measures modestly outperform GCS as predictors of GOS-E. The combination of GCS and AIS/ISS correlate with outcome better than do any of the three measures alone. Results support the addition of anatomic measures such as AIS and ISS in clinical studies of TBI. Additionally, most of the variance in outcome is not accounted for by currently available measures of injury severity.
机译:背景:损伤严重程度的评估对脑外伤患者的治疗很重要。我们的目的是分析头部缩写损伤评分(AIS),损伤严重程度评分(ISS)和格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)作为损伤严重程度和创伤性脑损伤后结局预测指标(TBI)的有用性。方法:前瞻性收集410例TBI患者的数据。入学时记录AIS,ISS和GCS。在伤后12个月,使用格拉斯哥成果量表(GOS-E)测量TBI后的受试者结局。进行了单变量和多变量分析。结果:结果信息来自270例患者(66%)。 ISS是GOS-E的最佳预测因子(rs -0.341,p <0.001),其次是GCS评分(rs head AIS(rs = -0.222,p <0.001)。当综合考虑时,GCS评分和ISS适度改善了与GOS-E的相关性(R = 0.335,p <0.001)。GCS评分与头部AIS的组合具有相似的效果(R 0.275,p <0.001)。年龄小于或等于老年患者的相关性更强。结论:GCS评分,AIS和ISS与12个月结局的相关性较弱,但严重解剖(GCS <或= 8)和轻度和中度伤害(GCS> 8)的患者与结局相关性较弱。 GCS是GOS-E的预测指标,GCS和AIS / ISS的组合与结局的相关性要比单独使用这三种措施中的任何一种都更好,结果支持在TBI的临床研究中增加解剖学措施,例如AIS和ISS。当前可用的伤害分级方法无法解释结果差异的原因ity。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号