Abstract
Background
We developed simple methods of risk adjustment for evaluating the quality of injury care (predicting survival probabilities of the injured) by fully utilizing routinely collected data in injury surveillance and clinical practices. Widely used methods of risk adjustment require additional data that are difficult to collect in resource-constrained settings.
Methods
We developed logistic regression models that predict survival using data obtained from 9,840 victims aged 15 years or older with blunt traumatic injuries who were registered in the Japan Trauma Data Bank, Japan’s national trauma registry, between January 2004 and December 2007. The models included three predictors: age, an anatomical injury severity parameter such as a simplified severity categorization (minor, moderate, and severe) described in the Injury Surveillance Guidelines, and a physiological status parameter. The models’ abilities to predict survival probabilities were evaluated using the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROCC).
Results
The simplified three-predictor models showed good performance with the AUROCC ranging from 0.86 to 0.94. In particular, the models with a consciousness level indicator as a physiological parameter showed a high AUROCC, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94, which was not much different from the performance of the widely used method that shows an AUROCC of 0.96.
Conclusions
Simplified methods of risk adjustment that require only routinely collected data will facilitate evaluation and improvement in the quality of injury care in resource-constrained low- and middle-income countries, where injuries are a growing public health concern.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
WHO. Disease and injury regional estimates for 2004. Available at: http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/estimates_regional/en/index.html. Accessed 15 September 2010
Mock C, Lormand JD, Goosen J et al. (2004) Guidelines for Essential Trauma Care, World Health Organization, Geneva
Mock C, Nguyen S, Quansah R et al (2006) Evaluation of trauma care capabilities in four countries using the WHO-IATSIC Guidelines for Essential Trauma Care. World J Surg 30:946–956
Mock C, Juillard C, Brundage S et al (eds) (2009) Guidelines for Trauma Quality Improvement Programmes. World Health Organization, Geneva
Nakahara S, Saint S, Sann S et al (2009) Evaluation of trauma care resources in health centers and referral hospitals in Cambodia. World J Surg 33:874–885
Champion HR (2002) Trauma scoring. Scand J Surg 91:12–22
Senkowski CK, McKenney MG (1999) Trauma scoring systems: a review. J Am Coll Surg 189:491–503
Osler T, Rutledge R, Deis J et al (1996) ICISS: an international classification of disease-9 based injury severity score. J Trauma 41:380–386
Kim Y, Jung KY, Kim CY et al (2000) Validation of the International Classification of Diseases 10th Edition-based Injury Severity Score (ICISS). J Trauma 48:280–285
Cryer C (2006) Severity of injury measures and descriptive epidemiology. Inj Prev 12:67–68
Kobusingye OC, Lett RR (2000) Hospital-based trauma registries in Uganda. J Trauma 48:498–502
Healey C, Osler TM, Rogers FB et al (2003) Improving the Glasgow Coma Scale score: motor score alone is a better predictor. J Trauma 54:671–678
Kilgo PD, Osler TM, Meredith W (2003) The worst injury predicts mortality outcome the best: rethinking the role of multiple injuries in trauma outcome scoring. J Trauma 55:599–606
Kilgo PD, Meredith JW, Osler TM (2006) Incorporating recent advances to make the TRISS approach universally available. J Trauma 60:1002–1008
Moore L, Lavoie A, Le Sage N et al (2008) Consensus or data-derived anatomic injury severity scoring? J Trauma 64:420–426
Holder Y, Peden M, Krug E et al (eds) (2001) Injury Surveillance Guidelines. World Health Organization, Geneva
Nakahara S, Jayatilleke AU, Ichikawa M et al (2008) Feasibility of standardized injury surveillance and reporting: a comparison of data from four Asian nations. Inj Prev 14:106–112
Japan Trauma Care and Research (2008) Japan Trauma Data Bank Report 2004–2007. http://www.jtcr-jatec.org/traumabank/dataroom/data/JTDB04-07eng.pdf. Accessed 15 September 2010
Ichikawa M, Nakahara S, Wakai S (2005) Factors related to participation in the Japan Trauma Data Bank. J Jpn Assoc Acute Med 16:552–556
Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (2000) Applied logistic regression, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York
Kimura A (2010) Logistic regression models for Japanese blunt trauma victims: second report. J Jpn Assoc Surg Trauma 24:321–326
Kimura A (2010) Logistic regression models for Japanese blunt trauma victims. J Jpn Assoc Surg Trauma 24:15–20
Nakahara S, Taira Y, Takahashi M et al. (2008) Extracting information from free-texts in computerized medical records of traffic injury patients admitted to a critical care medical center in Japan. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on human and computers, November 20–23, Nagaoka, Japan, pp 215–220
Zafar H, Rehmani R, Raja AJ et al (2002) Registry based trauma outcome: perspective of a developing country. Emerg Med J 19:391–394
Lane PL, Doig G, Mikrogianakis A et al (1996) An evaluation of Ontario trauma outcomes and the development of regional norms for Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) analysis. J Trauma 41:731–734
Nakahara S, Saint S, Sann S et al (2010) Exploring referral systems for injured patients in low-income countries: a case study from Cambodia. Health Policy Plan 25:319–327
DiRusso SM, Sullivan T, Holly C et al (2000) An artificial neural network as a model for prediction of survival in trauma patients: validation for a regional trauma area. J Trauma 49:212–220
Schluter PJ, Nathens A, Neal ML et al (2010) Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) coefficients 2009 revision. J Trauma 68:761–770
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by a Grant for Research on Global Health Issues from the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare of Japan. The authors are grateful to F. Miyamasu (Medical English Communications Center of the University of Tsukuba) for grammatical revision of the text.
Conflict of interest
none
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nakahara, S., Ichikawa, M. & Kimura, A. Simplified Alternative to the TRISS Method for Resource-Constrained Settings. World J Surg 35, 512–519 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-010-0865-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-010-0865-x