New Trauma Score versus Kampala Trauma Score II in predicting mortality following road traffic crash: a prospective multi-center cohort study

Author:

Damulira John,Muhumuza Joshua,Kabuye Umaru,Ssebaggala Godfrey,Wilson Michael Lowery,Bärnighausen Till,Lule Herman

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Mortality due to injuries disproportionately impact low income countries. Knowledge of who is at risk of poor outcomes is critical to guide resource allocation and prioritization of severely injured. Kampala Trauma Score (KTS), developed in 1996 and last modified in 2002 as KTS II, is still widely being used to predict injury outcomes in resource-limited settings with no further revisions in the past two decades, despite ongoing criticism of some of its parameters. The New Trauma Score (NTS), a recent development in 2017, has shown potential in mortality prediction, but a dearth of evidence exist regarding its performance in the African population. Objectives To compare NTS to the modified Kampala Trauma Score (KTS II) in the prediction of 30-day mortality, and injury severity amongst patients sustaining road traffic crashes in Ugandan low-resource settings. Methods Multi-center prospective cohort study of patients aged 15 years and above. Of the 194 participants, 85.1% were males with a mean age of 31.7 years. NTS and KTS II were determined for each participant within 30-minutes of admission and followed-up for 30 days to determine their injury outcomes. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) for predicting mortality were compared between the two trauma scores using SPSS version 22. Ethical clearance: Research and Ethics Committee of Kampala International University Western Campus (Ref No: KIU-2022-125). Results The injury severity classifications based on NTS vs. KTS II were mild (55.7% vs. 25.8%), moderate (29.9% vs. 30.4%), and severe (14.4% vs. 43.8%). The mortality rates for each injury severity category based on NTS vs. KTS II were mild (0.9% v 0%), moderate (20.7% vs. 5.1%), and severe (50% vs. 28.2%). The AUC was 0.87 for NTS (95% CI 0.808–0.931) vs. 0.86 (95% CI 0.794–0.919) for KTS II respectively. The sensitivity of NTS vs. KTS II in predicting mortality was 92.6% (95% CI: 88.9–96.3) vs. 70.4% (95% CI: 63.0-77.8) while the specificity was 70.7% (95% CI: 64.2–77.2) vs. 78.4% (95% CI: 72.1–84.7) at cut off points of 17 for NTS and 6 for KTS II respectively. Conclusions NTS was more sensitive but its specificity for purposes of 30-day mortality prediction was lower compared to KTS II. Thus, in low-resourced trauma environment where time constraints and pulse oximeters are of concern, KTS II remains superior to NTS.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media 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