Skip to main content
Injury Prevention logoLink to Injury Prevention
. 2003 Jun;9(2):156–162. doi: 10.1136/ip.9.2.156

A new approach to the analysis of multiple injuries using data from a national trauma registry

L Aharonson-Daniel 1, V Boyko 1, A Ziv 1, M Avitzour 1, K Peleg 1
PMCID: PMC1730962  PMID: 12810744

Abstract

Objective: To present a new systematic approach for summarizing multiple injury diagnosis data into patient injury profiles.

Design: International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision, clinical modification injury diagnosis codes were classified using a modification of the Barell body region by nature of injury diagnosis matrix, then grouped by body region, injury nature, or a combination of both. Profiles were built which describe patients' injury combinations based on matrix units, enabling the analysis of patients, and not only the study of injuries.

Setting: The Israeli national trauma registry was used to retrieve patient demographic data, injury details, and information on treatment and outcome.

Patients or subjects: All hospitalized patients injured in road traffic accidents and included in the trauma registry from January 1997 to December 2000 were included.

Main outcome measures: Patient profiles consisting of body regions, injury natures, their combination, and their clinical outcomes.

Results: The study population comprised 17 459 patients. Head and neck injuries were the most frequent in all subpopulations except for motorcyclists who sustained most injuries in the extremities. Fractures were the most common injury nature (60%). Pedestrians and drivers had the highest proportion of multiple injuries in both profiles.

Forty eight percent of the patients had a single cell profile. The most frequent conditions as a sole condition were extremity fractures (14%), internal injuries to the head (11%), and injuries of other nature to the torso (6%). Mortality, length of stay, and intensive care unit treatment varied dramatically between profiles and increased for multiple injury profiles. Inpatient death was an outcome for 3.3% overall; however, in patients with an internal injury to the head and torso, inpatient death rate was nine times higher, at 31%.

Conclusions: Profiles maintain information on body region and nature of injury. The use of injury profiles in describing the injured improves the understanding of casemix and can be useful for efficient staffing in multidisciplinary trauma teams and for various comparisons.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (269.3 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Baker S. P., O'Neill B., Haddon W., Jr, Long W. B. The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care. J Trauma. 1974 Mar;14(3):187–196. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barell V., Aharonson-Daniel L., Fingerhut L. A., Mackenzie E. J., Ziv A., Boyko V., Abargel A., Avitzour M., Heruti R. An introduction to the Barell body region by nature of injury diagnosis matrix. Inj Prev. 2002 Jun;8(2):91–96. doi: 10.1136/ip.8.2.91. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Copes W. S., Champion H. R., Sacco W. J., Lawnick M. M., Gann D. S., Gennarelli T., MacKenzie E., Schwaitzberg S. Progress in characterizing anatomic injury. J Trauma. 1990 Oct;30(10):1200–1207. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199010000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Huang Mu-Shun, Yang Yun-Fu, Lee Chen-Hsen. Evaluation of staff workload during resuscitation of trauma patients. J Trauma. 2002 Mar;52(3):492–497. doi: 10.1097/00005373-200203000-00013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Langley J. D., Phillips D., Marshall S. W. Inpatient costs of injury due to motor vehicle traffic crashes in New Zealand. Accid Anal Prev. 1993 Oct;25(5):585–592. doi: 10.1016/0001-4575(93)90010-t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Meredith J. Wayne, Evans Gregory, Kilgo Patrick D., MacKenzie Ellen, Osler Turner, McGwin Gerald, Cohn Stephen, Esposito Thomas, Gennarelli Thomas, Hawkins Michael. A comparison of the abilities of nine scoring algorithms in predicting mortality. J Trauma. 2002 Oct;53(4):621–629. doi: 10.1097/00005373-200210000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Miller T. R., Pindus N. M., Douglass J. B. Medically related motor vehicle injury costs by body region and severity. J Trauma. 1993 Feb;34(2):270–275. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199302000-00017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Nathens A. B., Jurkovich G. J., Maier R. V., Grossman D. C., MacKenzie E. J., Moore M., Rivara F. P. Relationship between trauma center volume and outcomes. JAMA. 2001 Mar 7;285(9):1164–1171. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.9.1164. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Osler T., Baker S. P., Long W. A modification of the injury severity score that both improves accuracy and simplifies scoring. J Trauma. 1997 Dec;43(6):922–926. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199712000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Regel G., Lobenhoffer P., Grotz M., Pape H. C., Lehmann U., Tscherne H. Treatment results of patients with multiple trauma: an analysis of 3406 cases treated between 1972 and 1991 at a German Level I Trauma Center. J Trauma. 1995 Jan;38(1):70–78. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199501000-00020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Rowland J., Rivara F., Salzberg P., Soderberg R., Maier R., Koepsell T. Motorcycle helmet use and injury outcome and hospitalization costs from crashes in Washington State. Am J Public Health. 1996 Jan;86(1):41–45. doi: 10.2105/ajph.86.1.41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Sacco W. J., MacKenzie E. J., Champion H. R., Davis E. G., Buckman R. F. Comparison of alternative methods for assessing injury severity based on anatomic descriptors. J Trauma. 1999 Sep;47(3):441–447. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199909000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Injury Prevention are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES