Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Aug 23:2024:4861308.
doi: 10.1155/2024/4861308. eCollection 2024.

Comparison of Injury Severity Score (ISS) and New Injury Severity Score (NISS) in the Evaluation of Thoracic Trauma Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

He Jin  1   2 , Yuanyuan Zhang  3 , Qi Zhang  1 , Lijuan Ouyang  1 , Xueyao Li  1 , Yiyan Zhang  1 , Baosheng Yang  1 , Junfeng Sun  1 , Chaohui Wei  1 , Guimei Yang  1 , Li Guan  4 , Shilan Luo  5 , Junyu Zhu  2 , Huaping Liang  2
Affiliations

Comparison of Injury Severity Score (ISS) and New Injury Severity Score (NISS) in the Evaluation of Thoracic Trauma Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

He Jin et al. Emerg Med Int. .

Abstract

Objective: To explore the value of the injury severity score (ISS) and the new injury severity score (NISS) for evaluating injuries and predicting complications (pneumonia and respiratory failure) and poor prognoses (in-hospital tracheal intubation, extended length of hospital stay, ICU admission, prolonged ICU stay, and death) in patients with thoracic trauma.

Methods: The data of consecutive patients with thoracic trauma who were admitted to the department of cardiothoracic surgery of a tertiary hospital between January 2018 and December 2021 were retrospectively collected. ISS and NISS were calculated for each patient. The study outcomes were complications and poor prognoses. The differences in ISS and NISS between patients with complications and poor prognoses and patients without the abovementioned conditions were compared using the Mann‒Whitney U test. Discrimination and calibration of ISS and NISS in predicting outcomes were compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) and Hosmer‒Lemeshow (H-L) statistic.

Results: A total of 310 patients were included. ISS and NISS of patients with complications and poor prognoses were greater than those of patients without complications and poor prognoses, respectively. The discrimination of ISS in predicting pneumonia, respiratory failure, in-hospital tracheal intubation, extended length of hospital stay, ICU admission, prolonged ICU stay, and death (AUCs: 0.609, 0.721, 0.848, 0.784, 0.763, 0.716, and 0.804, respectively) was not statistically significantly different from that of NISS in predicting the corresponding outcomes (AUCs: 0.628, 0.712, 0.795, 0.767, 0.750, 0.750, and 0.818, respectively). ISS showed better calibration than NISS for predicting pneumonia, respiratory failure, in-hospital tracheal intubation, extended length of hospital stay, and ICU admission but worse calibration for predicting prolonged ICU stay and death.

Conclusion: ISS and NISS are both suitable for injury evaluation. There was no statistically significant difference in discrimination between ISS and NISS, but they had different calibrations when predicting different outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Overview of the patient inclusion process for the analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of the injury severity score (ISS) and new injury severity score (NISS) for the prediction of (a) pneumonia, (b) respiratory failure, (c) in-hospital tracheal intubation, (d) extended length of hospital stay, (e) intensive care unit (ICU) admission, (f) prolonged ICU stay, and (g) death.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Jin H., Liu Z., Xiao Y., Fan X., Yan J., Liang H. Prediction of sepsis in trauma patients. Burns Trauma . 2014;2(3):106–113. doi: 10.4103/2321-3868.135479. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chrysou K., Halat G., Hoksch B., Schmid R. A., Kocher G. J. Lessons from a large trauma center: impact of blunt chest trauma in polytrauma patients-still a relevant problem? Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine . 2017;25(1):p. 42. doi: 10.1186/s13049-017-0384-y. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ala A., Shams-Vahdati S., Majidi G., Jalilian R. Necessity of emergency chest X-ray in a patient with multiple trauma with injury severity score >15. Eurasian Journal of Emergency Medicine . 2020;19(1):20–24. doi: 10.4274/eajem.galenos.2017.08760. - DOI
    1. Abri B., Shams-Vahdati S., Paknezhad S., Sepehri-majd P., Alizadeh S. Blunt abdominal trauma and organ damage and its prognosis. Journal of Analytical Research in Clinical Medicine . 2016;4(4):228–232. doi: 10.15171/jarcm.2016.038. - DOI
    1. Demirhan R., Onan B., Oz K., Halezeroglu S. Comprehensive analysis of 4205 patients with chest trauma: a 10-year experience. Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery . 2009;9(3):450–453. doi: 10.1510/icvts.2009.206599. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources