Comparison of two prognostic models in trauma outcome. BJS 2018; 105: 513-519.
Published: 21st February 2018
Authors: A. Cook, T. Osler, L. Glance, F. Lecky, O. Bouamra, J. Weddle et al.
The Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) in the UK publicly reports hospital performance in the management of trauma. The TARN risk adjustment model uses a fractional polynomial transformation of the Injury Severity Score (ISS) as the measure of anatomical injury severity. The Trauma Mortality Prediction Model (TMPM) is an alternative to ISS; this study compared the anatomical injury components of the TARN model with the TMPM.
Data from the National Trauma Data Bank for 2011–2015 were analysed. Probability of death was estimated for the TARN fractional polynomial transformation of ISS and compared with the TMPM. The coefficients for each model were estimated using 80 per cent of the data set, selected randomly. The remaining 20 per cent of the data were used for model validation. TMPM and TARN were compared using calibration curves, measures of discrimination (area under receiver operating characteristic curves; AUROC), proximity to the true model (Akaike information criterion; AIC) and goodness of model fit (Hosmer–Lemeshow test).
Some 438 058 patient records were analysed. TMPM demonstrated preferable AUROC (0·882 for TMPM
TMPM had greater discrimination, proximity to the true model and goodness‐of‐fit than the anatomical injury component of TARN. TMPM should be considered for the injury severity measure for the comparative assessment of trauma centres.Full text
You may also be interested in
Meta‐analysis of in‐hospital delay before surgery as a risk factor for complications in patients with acute appendicitis. BJS 2018; 105: 933-945.
Authors: S. T. van Dijk, A. H. van Dijk, M. G. Dijkgraaf, M. A. Boermeester
Notes: Delay is safe
Authors: T. G. Weiser, A. B. Haynes
Meta‐analysis comparing upfront surgery with neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 946-958.
Authors: E. Versteijne, J. A. Vogel, M. G. Besselink, O. R. C. Busch, J. W. Wilmink, J. G. Daams et al.
Notes: Improved survival with neoadjuvant treatment
Prognostic significance of gross extrathyroidal extension invading only strap muscles in differentiated thyroid carcinoma. BJS 2018; 105: 1155-1162.
Authors: S. Y. Park, H. I. Kim, J.‐H. Kim, J. S. Kim, Y. L. Oh, S. W. Kim et al.
Notes: None, for survival
Authors: M. Almquist, K. Ivarsson, E. Nordenström, A. Bergenfelz
Notes: Higher than expected
Authors: F. P. Prete, T. Abdel‐Aziz, C. Morkane, C. Brain, T. R. Kurzawinski, P. Hindmarsh et al.
Notes: Centralization needed
Authors: M. Mansourati, V. Kumar, M. Khajanchi, M. L. Saha, S. Dharap, R. Seger et al.
Notes: High burden of late mortality
Meta‐analysis evaluating music interventions for anxiety and pain in surgery. BJS 2018; 105: 773-783.
Authors: A. Y. R. Kühlmann, A. de Rooij, L. F. Kroese, M. van Dijk, M. G. M. Hunink, J. Jeekel et al.
Interobserver variability in the classification of appendicitis during laparoscopy. BJS 2018; 105: 1014-1019.
Authors: A. L. van den Boom, E. M. L. de Wijkerslooth, K. A. L. Mauff, I. Dawson, C. C. van Rossem, B. R. Toorenvliet et al.
Development and evaluation of a patient‐centred measurement tool for surgeons’ non‐technical skills. BJS 2018; 105: 876-884.
Authors: J. Yule, K. Hill, S. Yule
Notes: Valid and reliable