We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Comparison of modified Kampala trauma score with trauma mortality prediction model and trauma-injury severity score: A National Trauma Data Bank Study.
American Journal of Emergency Medicine 2017 August
BACKGROUND: Mortality prediction of trauma patients relies on anatomical, physiological or combined scores. The purpose of this study is to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the modified Kampala Trauma Score (M-KTS) with the Trauma Mortality Prediction Model (TMPM), and Trauma-Injury Severity Score (TRISS) using data from a large dataset from a developed registry, the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB).
METHODS: Using 2011 and 2012 data from NTDB, patient based trauma scores (M-KTS, TMPM, and TRISS) were calculated and predictive ability of M-KTS for mortality was compared with other trauma scores using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves.
RESULTS: A total of 841089 patients were included in the study. TRISS outperformed other scores (AUC=0.922, %95 CI 0.920-0.924) with M-KTS as the second best score (AUC=0.901, %95 CI 0.899-0.903) followed by TMPM (AUC=0.887, 95% CI 0.844-0.889). For blunt trauma, TRISS (AUC=0.917, 95% CI 0.915-0.919) performed better than M-KTS (AUC=0.891, %95 CI 0.889-0.893) and TMPM (AUC=0.874, 95% CI 0.871-0.877). For penetrating trauma, M-KTS (AUC=0.956, 95% CI 0.954-0.959) and TMPM (AUC=0.955, 95% CI 0.951-0.958) had similar performance after TRISS (AUC=0.969, 95% CI 0.967-0.971).
CONCLUSION: M-KTS performed worse than TRISS although its' main advantage is simple use in resource-limited settings.
METHODS: Using 2011 and 2012 data from NTDB, patient based trauma scores (M-KTS, TMPM, and TRISS) were calculated and predictive ability of M-KTS for mortality was compared with other trauma scores using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves.
RESULTS: A total of 841089 patients were included in the study. TRISS outperformed other scores (AUC=0.922, %95 CI 0.920-0.924) with M-KTS as the second best score (AUC=0.901, %95 CI 0.899-0.903) followed by TMPM (AUC=0.887, 95% CI 0.844-0.889). For blunt trauma, TRISS (AUC=0.917, 95% CI 0.915-0.919) performed better than M-KTS (AUC=0.891, %95 CI 0.889-0.893) and TMPM (AUC=0.874, 95% CI 0.871-0.877). For penetrating trauma, M-KTS (AUC=0.956, 95% CI 0.954-0.959) and TMPM (AUC=0.955, 95% CI 0.951-0.958) had similar performance after TRISS (AUC=0.969, 95% CI 0.967-0.971).
CONCLUSION: M-KTS performed worse than TRISS although its' main advantage is simple use in resource-limited settings.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app