Assessing the Predictive Accuracy of Trauma Scoring Systems for In-Hospital Mortality in Resource-Limited Settings

Introduction: Rapid, reliable prognostication is essential for guiding triage and clinical management in resource‑constrained trauma centers. We evaluated three widely used scoring systems—the Injury Severity Score , Revised Trauma Score , and Trauma and Injury Severity Score—to determine their accuracy in predicting in‑hospital mortality. Methods: In this single‑center cohort study, we retrospectively analyzed 1,027 consecutive trauma admissions to the University Hospital for Traumatic Injuries in Albania (October 2024–January 2025). Of these, 429 patients (41.8%) required hospitalization. We calculated Injury Severity Score, Revised Trauma Score, and Trauma and Injury Severity Score for each hospitalized patient and compared predictive performance using means ± SD, p‑values, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and calibration analyses. Results: The mean Injury Severity Score was 21.9 ± 6.1 (p < 0.001), indicating strong association with mortality but limited definitive prognostication. Revised Trauma Score averaged 7.43 ± 1.20 (p < 0.001), demonstrating utility for rapid triage with a clear inverse correlation to mortality. Trauma and Injury Severity Score yielded a mean predicted survival probability of 94.3 ± 4.2 (p < 0.001), outperforming Injury Severity Score and Revised Trauma Score in discrimination (highest area under ROC curve) and calibration, though its accuracy decreased in patients with significant comorbidities. Conclusions: All three scoring systems significantly predicted in‑hospital mortality (p < 0.001), with Trauma and Injury Severity Score offering the most comprehensive prognostic value by integrating anatomical, physiological, age, and injury‑type variables. Injury Severity Score remains useful for surgical urgency planning, and Revised Trauma Scale excels in immediate triage. However, none fully account for comorbid conditions, underscoring the need for enriched datasets and AI‑driven models in future large‑scale research.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2025-04-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16539293
Primary Topic
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessing the Predictive Accuracy of Trauma Scoring Systems for In-Hospital Mortality in Resource-Limited Settings

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
article

Assessing the Predictive Accuracy of Trauma Scoring Systems for In-Hospital Mortality in Resource-Limited Settings

article en

Abstract

Introduction: Rapid, reliable prognostication is essential for guiding triage and clinical management in resource‑constrained trauma centers. We evaluated three widely used scoring systems—the Injury Severity Score , Revised Trauma Score , and Trauma and Injury Severity Score—to determine their accuracy in predicting in‑hospital mortality. Methods: In this single‑center cohort study, we retrospectively analyzed 1,027 consecutive trauma admissions to the University Hospital for Traumatic Injuries in Albania (October 2024–January 2025). Of these, 429 patients (41.8%) required hospitalization. We calculated Injury Severity Score, Revised Trauma Score, and Trauma and Injury Severity Score for each hospitalized patient and compared predictive performance using means ± SD, p‑values, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and calibration analyses. Results: The mean Injury Severity Score was 21.9 ± 6.1 (p < 0.001), indicating strong association with mortality but limited definitive prognostication. Revised Trauma Score averaged 7.43 ± 1.20 (p < 0.001), demonstrating utility for rapid triage with a clear inverse correlation to mortality. Trauma and Injury Severity Score yielded a mean predicted survival probability of 94.3 ± 4.2 (p < 0.001), outperforming Injury Severity Score and Revised Trauma Score in discrimination (highest area under ROC curve) and calibration, though its accuracy decreased in patients with significant comorbidities. Conclusions: All three scoring systems significantly predicted in‑hospital mortality (p < 0.001), with Trauma and Injury Severity Score offering the most comprehensive prognostic value by integrating anatomical, physiological, age, and injury‑type variables. Injury Severity Score remains useful for surgical urgency planning, and Revised Trauma Scale excels in immediate triage. However, none fully account for comorbid conditions, underscoring the need for enriched datasets and AI‑driven models in future large‑scale research.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
University of Medicine Tirana (AL), Pennsylvania State University (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 39%
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Assessing the Predictive Accuracy of Trauma Scoring Systems for In-Hospital Mortality in Resource-Limited Settings · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS