| Literature DB >> 21149354 |
R J Russell1, T J Hodgetts, J McLeod, K Starkey, P Mahoney, K Harrison, E Bell.
Abstract
This paper discusses mathematical models of expressing severity of injury and probability of survival following trauma and their use in establishing clinical governance of a trauma system. There are five sections: (i) Historical overview of scoring systems--anatomical, physiological and combined systems and the advantages and disadvantages of each. (ii) Definitions used in official statistics--definitions of 'killed in action' and other categories and the importance of casualty reporting rates and comparison across conflicts and nationalities. (iii) Current scoring systems and clinical governance--clinical governance of the trauma system in the Defence Medical Services (DMS) by using trauma scoring models to analyse injury and clinical patterns. (iv) Unexpected outcomes--unexpected outcomes focus clinical governance tools. Unexpected survivors signify good practice to be promulgated. Unexpected deaths pick up areas of weakness to be addressed. Seventy-five clinically validated unexpected survivors were identified over 2 years during contemporary combat operations. (v) Future developments--can the trauma scoring methods be improved? Trauma scoring systems use linear approaches and have significant weaknesses. Trauma and its treatment is a complex system. Nonlinear methods need to be investigated to determine whether these will produce a better approach to the analysis of the survival from major trauma.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21149354 PMCID: PMC3013430 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0232
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci ISSN: 0962-8436 Impact factor: 6.237