Literature DB >> 12045647

Standardized outcome evaluation after blunt multiple injuries by scoring systems: a clinical follow-up investigation 2 years after injury.

Michael Stalp1, Claudia Koch, Steffen Ruchholtz, Gerd Regel, Martin Panzica, Christian Krettek, Hans-Christoph Pape.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the state of rehabilitation in patients with blunt multiple injuries 2 years after their initial injuries, using several standardized scales and a recently described comprehensive scoring system, by means of a prospective clinical multicenter study.
METHODS: Two years after the initial injury, patients with blunt multiple injuries (Injury Severity Score > or = 16) underwent a clinical follow-up in 5 German Level I trauma centers. The reassessment included a complete head-to-toe examination of the musculoskeletal system and a neurologic examination. The following patient-assessed health status scores were used to determine the quality of life: Short-Form 12, Functional Independence Measurement, and Musculoskeletal Function Assessment. Moreover, a comprehensive scoring system developed in our department (Hannover Score for Polytrauma Outcome [HASPOC]) was used that includes provider-report (physician's examination) and self-report (score systems) criteria.
RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-four of 312 patients who had been injured between January 1995 and July 1996 were reexamined between January 1, 1997, and July 1, 1998. Among the remaining 58 patients, 9 had died by the time of follow-up, and 49 patients had not accepted the invitation. The mean age of those patients who underwent reexamination was 36 +/- 13 years, the mean Injury Severity Score was 24 +/- 6, and the mean initial Glasgow Coma Scale score was 11 +/- 4 (Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) head score of 3.3 +/- 1.1; AIS face, 1.4 +/- 0.1; AIS chest, 3.0 +/- 0.8; AIS abdomen, 1.7 +/- 0.6; and AIS extremities, 3.4 +/- 0.8). The general outcome (Short-Form 12) was as follows: grade I, 9%; grade II, 25%; grade III, 29%; grade IV, 25%; grade V, 6%; and grade VI, 6%. The outcome of the injured extremity demonstrated moderate or severe restrictions according to the Musculoskeletal Function Assessment in 41% of injuries of the lower extremity and in 16% of injuries of the upper extremity. Among patients with injuries to the lower extremity, 52% experienced pain or impaired ability to walk related to an injury of the foot or ankle, 31% indicated pain after a knee or thigh injury, and 27% indicated pain after a femoral or hip injury. The most severe deficits in the range of motion occurred in the foot and the ankle region (13.4% deficit of range of motion < 20% of normal range, p < 0.05 to other injuries). The results of the outcome obtained by self-report correlated with the clinical examination when a scoring system was used that was described recently, the HASPOC.
CONCLUSION: In a standardized multicenter reexamination of patients with blunt multiple injuries, the general outcome was usually fair or good. Both the complaints and the objective results of specific extremity areas demonstrated that most limitations were because of injuries below the knee. These results were adequately reflected by a comprehensive scoring system, combining self-report and provider report (HASPOC).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12045647     DOI: 10.1097/00005373-200206000-00023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Trauma        ISSN: 0022-5282


  21 in total

1.  [Clinical course and prognostic significance of immunological and functional parameters after severe trauma].

Authors:  S Lendemans; E Kreuzfelder; C Waydhas; D Nast-Kolb; S Flohé
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 2.  Evaluation of instruments for measuring the burden of sport and active recreation injury.

Authors:  Nadine E Andrew; Belinda J Gabbe; Rory Wolfe; Peter A Cameron
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 11.136

3.  Does additional head trauma affect the long-term outcome after upper extremity trauma in multiple traumatized patients: is there an additional effect of traumatic brain injury?

Authors:  Hagen Andruszkow; Christian Probst; Orna Grün; Christian Krettek; Frank Hildebrand
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  [Pain assessment of severely injured patients 2 years after trauma].

Authors:  S Kaske; R Lefering; B Bouillon; M Maegele; A Driessen; C Probst; C Simanski
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 1.107

5.  [Long-term results after multiple trauma with ISS ≥ 25. Outcome and predictors of quality of life].

Authors:  S Simmel; S Drisch; S Haag; V Bühren
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  [Limb salvage and amputation after trauma : Decision criteria and management algorithm].

Authors:  C Krettek; A Lerner; P Giannoudis; C Willy; C W Müller
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 1.000

7.  Psychometric properties of questionnaires evaluating health-related quality of life and functional status in polytrauma patients with lower extremity injury.

Authors:  Lian Jansen; Martijn Pm Steultjens; Herman R Holtslag; Gert Kwakkel; Joost Dekker
Journal:  J Trauma Manag Outcomes       Date:  2010-06-28

Review 8.  Systematic review of the literature on pain in patients with polytrauma including traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Steven K Dobscha; Michael E Clark; Benjamin J Morasco; Michele Freeman; Rose Campbell; Mark Helfand
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.750

Review 9.  [Surviving multiple trauma--what comes next? The rehabilitation of seriously injured patients].

Authors:  S Simmel; V Bühren
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.000

10.  The evolution of trauma services at Beaumont Hospital.

Authors:  M C Fitzgibbon; M Donnelly; J P Phillips; P Murray; R Moran; D J Bouchier-Hayes
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 1.568

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.