Comparison of the previous and current trauma-related shock classifications – The more the better? – A retrospective cohort study from a level I trauma centre

Author:

Jávor Péter1,Csonka Endre1,Butt Edina1,Rárosi Ferenc1,Babik Barna1,Varga Endre1,Hartmann Petra1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Szegedi Tudomanyegyetem Altalanos Orvostudomanyi Kar

Abstract

Abstract Background: The aim was to compare the predictive performance of the current, extended (VS+BD) Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) classification for hypovolaemic shock over the previous, vital sign (VS)-based classification with respect to mortality outcomes. We also studied the prognostic values of heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and base deficit (BD).Methods: The present study is a retrospective analysis at a level I trauma centre between 11 July 2014 and 11 September 2019. Trauma patients (inclusion criteria: trauma team activation, transport directly from scene, no need for resuscitation on scene, precise and detailed medical documentation, age ≥16, 30-day follow-up, complete dataset for HR, SBP, GCS and BD) were allocated to shock classes (I–IV) based on the VS and VS+BD criteria. The predictive values for the classifications were compared with a two-proportion Z-test, while individual parameters were examined with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses.Results: A total of 156 patients met the inclusion criteria out of 60,037 trauma admissions. Both the VS and VS+BD classifications have shown a strong relation to mortality (P=0.0001 vs. P=0.000009). There was no significant difference in their predictive performance. According to the statistical analysis, GCS, BD and SBP showed significant prognostic values (AUCGCS=0.799 [CI: 0.722, 0.875]; AUCBD=0.683, [CI: 0.576, 0.790]; AUCSBP=0.633, [CI: 0.521, 0.744]). HR was found ineffective in predicting mortality. Conclusions: The current ATLS classification for hypovolaemic shock did not appear to be superior to the previous, VS-based classification in our study setting. GCS, BD and SBP were proven to be useful parameters in prognosticating outcome. The role of HR should be reconsidered, since it does not seem to reflect the clinical condition accurately.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3