Worthing Physiological Score vs Revised Trauma Score in Outcome Prediction of Trauma patients; a Comparative Study

• Main Authors: Babak Nakhjavan-Shahraki, Mahmoud Yousefifard, Mohammad Javad Hajighanbari, Masoud Baikpour, Jalaledin Mirzay Razaz, Mehdi Yaseri, Kavous Shahsavari, Fatemeh Mahdizadeh, Mostafa Hosseini
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences 2016-12-01
• Series: Emergency
• Subjects: Trauma Severity Indices; Prognosis; Trauma; emergency department; decision support techniques
• Online Access: http://journals.sbmu.ac.ir/emergency/article/view/14682

<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Awareness about the outcome of trauma patients in the emergency department (ED) has become a topic of interest. Accordingly, the present study aimed to compare the rapid trauma score (RTS) and worthing physiological scoring system (WPSS) in predicting in-hospital mortality and poor outcome of trauma patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this comparative study trauma patients brought to five EDs in different cities of Iran during the year 2016 were included. After data collection, discriminatory power and calibration of the models were assessed and compared using STATA 11.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>2148 patients with the mean age of 39.50±17.27 years were included (75.56% males). The AUC of RTS and WPSS models for prediction of mortality were 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.90) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87-0.94), respectively (p=0.006). RTS had a sensitivity of 71.54 (95% CI: 62.59-79.13) and a specificity of 97.38 (95% CI: 96.56-98.01) in prediction of mortality. These measures for the WPSS were 87.80 (95% CI: 80.38-92.78) and 83.45 (95% CI: 81.75-85.04), respectively. The AUC of RTS and WPSS in predicting poor outcome were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.77-0.85) and 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.92), respectively (p&lt;0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings showed a higher prognostic value for the WPSS model in predicting mortality and severe disabilities in trauma patients compared to the RTS model.  Both models had good overall performance in prediction of mortality and poor outcome.</p>