Comparison of National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Surgical Risk Calculator and Trauma and Injury Severity Score Risk Assessment Tools in Predicting Outcomes in High-Risk Operative Trauma Patients

Author:

Santos Jeffrey1,Kuza Catherine M.2,Luo Xi3,Ogunnaike Babatunde3,Ahmed M. Iqbal3,Melikman Emily3,Moon Tiffany3,Shoultz Thomas4,Feeler Anne4,Dudaryk Roman5,Navas Jose5,Vasileiou Georgia6,Yeh D. Dante6ORCID,Matsushima Kazuhide7,Forestiere Matthew7,Lian Tiffany7,Grigorian Areg1,Ricks-Oddie Joni8,Nahmias Jeffry1

Affiliation:

1. Division of Trauma, Burns, Critical Care & Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA

2. Department of Anesthesiology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

3. Department of Anesthesiology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA

4. Division of Burns, Trauma and Critical Care, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA

5. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA

6. Department of Surgery, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA

7. Department of Surgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

8. Institute for Clinical and Translation Sciences and Center for Statistical Consulting, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA

Abstract

Background The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) uses anatomic/physiologic variables to predict outcomes. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Surgical Risk Calculator (NSQIP-SRC) includes functional status and comorbidities. It is unclear which of these tools is superior for high-risk trauma patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) class IV or V). This study compares risk prediction of TRISS and NSQIP-SRC for mortality, length of stay (LOS), and complications for high-risk operative trauma patients. Methods This is a prospective study of high-risk (ASA-PS IV or V) trauma patients (≥18 years-old) undergoing surgery at 4 trauma centers. We compared TRISS vs NSQIP-SRC vs NSQIP-SRC + TRISS for ability to predict mortality, LOS, and complications using linear, logistic, and negative binomial regression. Results Of 284 patients, 48 (16.9%) died. The median LOS was 16 days and number of complications was 1. TRISS + NSQIP-SRC best predicted mortality (AUROC: .877 vs .723 vs .843, P = .0018) and number of complications (pseudo-R2/median error (ME) 5.26%/1.15 vs 3.39%/1.33 vs 2.07%/1.41, P < .001) compared to NSQIP-SRC or TRISS, but there was no difference between TRISS + NSQIP-SRC and NSQIP-SRC with LOS prediction ( P = .43). Discussion For high-risk operative trauma patients, TRISS + NSQIP-SRC performed better at predicting mortality and number of complications compared to NSQIP-SRC or TRISS alone but similar to NSQIP-SRC alone for LOS. Thus, future risk prediction and comparisons across trauma centers for high-risk operative trauma patients should include a combination of anatomic/physiologic data, comorbidities, and functional status.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Medicine

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