Injury · 2024
The MOST (Mortality Score for TBI): A novel prediction model beyond CRASH-Basic and IMPACT-Core for isolated traumatic brain injury.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Karabacak Mert, Jagtiani Pemla, Dams-O'Connor Kristen, Legome Eric, Hickman Zachary L, Margetis Konstantinos
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Due to significant injury heterogeneity, outcome prediction following traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging. This study aimed to develop a simple model for high-accuracy mortality risk prediction after TBI.
STUDY DESIGN: Data from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Trauma Quality Program (TQP) from 2019 to 2021 was used to develop a summary score based on age, the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) component subscores, and pupillary reactivity data. We then compared the predictive accuracy to that of the Corticosteroid Randomisation After Significant Head Injury Trial (CRASH)-Basic and International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trial in TBI (IMPACT)-Core models. Two separate series of sensitivity analyses were conducted to further assess our model's generalizability. We evaluated predictive performance of the models with discrimination [the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC), sensitivity, specificity] and calibration (Brier score). Discriminative ability was compared with DeLong tests.
RESULTS: 259,404 patients were included in the present study (mean age, 60 years; 93,495 (36 %) female). The mortality score after TBI (MOST) model (AUC = 0.875) had better discrimination (DeLong test p values < 0.00001) than CRASH-Basic (AUC = 0.837) and IMPACT-Core (AUC = 0.821) models, and superior calibration (MOST = 0.02729, CRASH-Basic = 0.02962, IMPACT-Core = 0.02962) in predicting in-hospital mortality. The MOST model similarly outperformed in predicting 3-, 7-, 14-, and 30-day mortality.
CONCLUSION: The MOST model can be rapidly calculated and outperforms two widely used models for predicting mortality in TBI patients. It utilizes a larger, contemporaneous dataset that reflects modern trauma care.
STUDY DESIGN: Data from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Trauma Quality Program (TQP) from 2019 to 2021 was used to develop a summary score based on age, the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) component subscores, and pupillary reactivity data. We then compared the predictive accuracy to that of the Corticosteroid Randomisation After Significant Head Injury Trial (CRASH)-Basic and International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trial in TBI (IMPACT)-Core models. Two separate series of sensitivity analyses were conducted to further assess our model's generalizability. We evaluated predictive performance of the models with discrimination [the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC), sensitivity, specificity] and calibration (Brier score). Discriminative ability was compared with DeLong tests.
RESULTS: 259,404 patients were included in the present study (mean age, 60 years; 93,495 (36 %) female). The mortality score after TBI (MOST) model (AUC = 0.875) had better discrimination (DeLong test p values < 0.00001) than CRASH-Basic (AUC = 0.837) and IMPACT-Core (AUC = 0.821) models, and superior calibration (MOST = 0.02729, CRASH-Basic = 0.02962, IMPACT-Core = 0.02962) in predicting in-hospital mortality. The MOST model similarly outperformed in predicting 3-, 7-, 14-, and 30-day mortality.
CONCLUSION: The MOST model can be rapidly calculated and outperforms two widely used models for predicting mortality in TBI patients. It utilizes a larger, contemporaneous dataset that reflects modern trauma care.