严重创伤患者损伤严重度评分的一致性

doi:10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2024.01.024

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 通过3名临床医师对严重创伤患者的损伤严重度评分(injury severity score, ISS)进行一致性分析，确定该评分对于临床严重创伤患者病情评估的准确性及对医疗资源分配的指导价值。方法: 选取北京大学人民医院2020年9月至2021年12月收治的100例重伤或严重创伤患者(ISS≥16分)，将患者入院后的一般信息(性别、年龄)、生命体征、体格检查、影像学、实验室检查等数据分别交由3名创伤外科专业临床医师作为评价者进行回顾性诊断，并进行ISS评分，使用SPSS 22.0软件进行相关统计学分析，对各项数据的观察值进行描述，并使用Fleiss kappa检验对3名医师之间ISS评分可信度进行一致性分析。结果: 通过3名评价者对100例严重创伤患者的ISS评分进行一致性分析得出总Fleiss kappa值为0.581，整体一致性为中等。根据ISS评分计算规则对不同分值进行一致性分析，其中单部位严重创伤简明损伤评分(abbreviated injury scale, AIS)为4分或5分、ISS评分为16或25分的患者，3名评价者间Fleiss kappa值分别为0.756及0.712，有较高的一致性；各部位AIS均≥4分，即ISS总评分≥41分的严重创伤患者，3名评价者间Fleiss kappa值均≥0.8，有高度的一致性。结论: 根据3名评价者对于严重创伤患者的ISS评分一致性分析可知，当救治或转运ISS≥16分的严重创伤患者时，该评分在用于科室间沟通或医院间转运时存在一定的准确性误差，不同评价者对于同一损伤的评分一致性中等，可能造成对于病情严重程度的误判以及医疗资源分配的不当，但对于单部位或多部位AIS评分≥4分的创伤患者，ISS评分在不同评价者间高度一致，可准确表明及传达患者病情严重程度。

关键词: 严重创伤, 损伤严重度, 一致性

Abstract:

Objective: To determine the accuracy of injury severity score (ISS)in the assessment of patients with severe trauma by the consistency analysis of the patients'ISS with severe trauma scored by three clinicians, and to guide the allocation of medical resource. Methods: Through retrospective analysis of 100 patients with serious or severe trauma admitted to Peking University People's Hospital since September 2020 to December 2021 (ISS≥16 points), we conducted a consistency analysis of ISS within different evaluators. The general information (gender, age), vital signs, physical examination, imaging, laboratory examination and other associated data of the patients after admission were retrospectively diagnosed by 3 clinicians specializing in trauma surgery and ISS was determined. SPSS 22.0 software was used for statistical analysis, descriptive reports were made on the observed values of each set of data, and Fleiss kappa test was used for consistency analysis of the credibility of the ISS within three clinicians. Results: Through the consistency analysis of the ISS in 100 patients with severe trauma scored by 3 eva-luators, the total Fleiss kappa value was 0.581, and the overall consistency was medium. Consistency analysis of the different scores was conducted according to the calculation rules of ISS. Among the patients with single-site severe trauma, abbreviated injury scale (AIS) was 4 or 5 points, ISS was 16 or 25 points, and Fleiss kappa value was 0.756 and 0.712 within the three evaluators, showing a relatively high consistency. AIS of each part was more than 4 points, and total ISS was more than 41 points in the severe trauma patients, Fleiss kappa values are higher than 0.8 within the 3 evaluators, showing a high consistency. Conclusion: According to the consistency analysis of severe trauma patients ISS within the three evaluators, when the severe trauma patients with ISS≥16 points are treated or transported, there is a certain accuracy error when the score is used for inter-department communication or inter-hospital transportation, and the consistency of different evaluators for the same injury is moderate. It may lead to misjudgment of the severity of trauma and misallocation of medical resources. However, for trauma patients with single or multiple site AIS≥4 points, ISS is highly consistent among different evaluators, which can accurately indicate the severity of the patient's condition.

Key words: Severe trauma, Injury severity, Consistency

中图分类号:

R642

陈逸凡,刘中砥,张鹏,黄伟. 严重创伤患者损伤严重度评分的一致性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(1): 157-160.

Yifan CHEN,Zhongdi LIU,Peng ZHANG,Wei HUANG. Consistency of injury severity score in severe trauma patients[J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2024, 56(1): 157-160.

图/表 2

表1

表2

参考文献 11

1	朱佩芳. 损伤严重程度评分的演进[J]. 中华创伤杂志, 2005, 21 (1): 39- 42.
2	Maduz R , Kugelmeier P , Meili S , et al. Major influence of interobserver reliability on polytrauma identification with the injury severity score (ISS): Time for a centralised coding in trauma registries?[J]. Injury, 2017, 48 (4): 885- 889. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.02.015
3	Twiss E , Krijnen P , Schipper I , et al. Accuracy and reliability of injury coding in the national Dutch Trauma Registry[J]. Int J Qual Health Care, 2021, 33 (1): mzab041. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzab041
4	周志道, 冯须, 王绍光, 等. 矿区骨盆骨折125例分析[J]. 煤矿医学, 1983, 5 (3): 20- 22.
5	都定元. 创伤评分的演进与AIS 2005[J]. 创伤外科杂志, 2006, 8 (3): 193- 197. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-4237.2006.03.001
6	李思齐, 汤曼力, 高伟, 等. AIS-ISS法在评估多发伤病情及预后中的作用[J]. 创伤外科杂志, 2005, 7 (5): 357- 359. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-4237.2005.05.014
7	赵威, 黄杨, 王玉同, 等. 损伤严重程度评分对重度创伤病情评估的意义与预后相关性研究[J]. 临床误诊误治, 2014, 27 (1): 7- 10.
8	马飞. ISS评分对严重创伤患者病情及预后的预测价值[J]. 海南医学, 2018, 29 (6): 789- 791.
9	陈小凤, 阳文新, 孙守松, 等. ISS评分与CRAMS评分在多发伤患者预后评估中的应用[J]. 中华急诊医学杂志, 2017, 26 (6): 664- 668.
10	王曼维, 李岩, 鱼锋, 等. 基于ISS评估急诊科多发创伤患者滞留时间与其转归分析[J]. 中华急诊医学杂志, 2020, 29 (4): 578- 581.
11	梁建军, 徐飞, 廖阳, 等. ISS与APACHEⅡ评分对急诊多发伤患者伤情评估的价值分析[J]. 现代生物医学进展, 2020, 20 (6): 1138- 1141.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Variables	Data
Age/years, M (min，max)	52 (14，87)
Gender, n (%)
Male	72 (72)
Female	28 (28)
Mechanism of injury, n (%)
Traffic accident	58 (58)
Fall from height	23 (23)
Tumbles injury	13 (13)
Blast injury	4 (4)
Stab injury	2 (2)
ISS, M (min，max)	25 (16，75)

ISS score	Fleiss kappa	Z value	P value	95%CI
14	0.493	8.543	< 0.001	0.492，0.494
16	0.756	13.091	< 0.001	0.755，0.757
17	0.511	8.857	< 0.001	0.510，0.512
18	0.645	11.178	< 0.001	0.644，0.646
19	0.122	2.120	0.034	0.121，0.123
20	0.390	6.752	< 0.001	0.389，0.391
21	0.660	11.429	< 0.001	0.659，0.661
22	0.382	6.615	< 0.001	0.381，0.383
24	0.550	9.534	< 0.001	0.549，0.551
25	0.712	12.339	< 0.001	0.711，0.713
26	0.252	4.360	< 0.001	0.251，0.253
27	0.550	9.534	< 0.001	0.549，0.551
28	-0.003	-0.058	0.954	-0.004，-0.002
29	0.483	8.362	< 0.001	0.482，0.484
30	-0.007	-0.116	0.907	-0.008，-0.006
31	-0.007	-0.116	0.907	-0.008，-0.006
32	0.327	5.657	< 0.001	0.326，0.328
33	0.427	7.400	< 0.001	0.426，0.428
34	0.764	13.226	< 0.001	0.763，0.765
35	0.327	5.657	< 0.001	0.326，0.328
36	0.327	5.657	< 0.001	0.326，0.328
41	0.920	15.928	< 0.001	0.919，0.921
45	0.872	15.096	< 0.001	0.871，0.873
57	1.000	17.321	< 0.001	0.999，1.001
66	1.000	17.321	< 0.001	0.999，1.001
75	1.000	17.321	< 0.001	0.999，1.001

[1]	郭辅政,赵秀娟,邓玖旭,杜哲,王天兵,朱凤雪. 严重创伤患者早期外周血淋巴细胞变化与预后之间的关系[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(3): 552-556.
[2]	杜哲,黄伟,王志伟,周靖,熊建,李明,张鹏,刘中砥,朱凤雪,王传林,姜保国,王天兵. 多学科协作诊疗模式在严重创伤患者救治中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(2): 298-301.