Comparing NISS and ISS for Mortality Prediction in Trauma Patients

NCT ID: NCT06705959

Last Updated: 2025-04-27

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

RECRUITING

Total Enrollment

200 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2025-04-28

Study Completion Date

2025-06-15

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The goal of this prospective cohort study is to compare the predictive utility of the New Injury Severity Score (NISS) and the Injury Severity Score (ISS) in determining mortality outcomes among trauma patients admitted to emergency rooms (ER) in Iraq.

The main questions it aims to answer are:

* Does the NISS provide a more accurate prediction of mortality than the ISS?
* Are there specific subgroups of trauma patients where one scoring system outperforms the other?

Participants will:

Be assessed using both the NISS and the ISS upon their ER admission. Have their clinical outcomes, including mortality, monitored throughout their hospital stay.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Trauma is a leading global cause of morbidity and mortality, particularly among individuals under 40 years of age, accounting for approximately 5 million deaths annually. To address the challenges of assessing trauma severity, tools like the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the New Injury Severity Score (NISS) have been developed to predict patient outcomes, including mortality. The ISS, introduced in 1974, is based on the Abbreviated Injury Scale and evaluates the three most severely injured body regions. However, it has limitations, including its inability to account for multiple injuries in the same body region. To overcome these, the NISS was introduced in 1997, summing the squares of the three most severe injuries, irrespective of location, potentially offering improved predictive accuracy in certain trauma populations.

The predictive accuracy of ISS and NISS has been extensively studied, with mixed findings. Meta-analyses and cohort studies suggest both tools are effective, with NISS often demonstrating slightly superior sensitivity and area under the curve (AUC) for mortality prediction. For instance, one analysis reported an AUC of 0.9095 for NISS versus 0.9009 for ISS in predicting mortality. While both tools are considered reliable, NISS's ability to account for multiple severe injuries within the same region makes it particularly advantageous in cases of polytrauma.

Despite these advances, significant heterogeneity exists among studies, largely due to differences in trauma mechanisms, patient populations, and study methodologies. For instance, blunt versus penetrating trauma and age-related factors can influence the tools' performance. Additionally, the lack of standardized reporting and quality assurance in scoring further complicates comparisons, highlighting a need for more uniform research protocols.

In Iraq, where trauma from road traffic accidents and violence is prevalent, evaluating the predictive utility of ISS and NISS is particularly important. Despite the global use of these tools, limited data exists on their effectiveness in Middle Eastern populations, where differences in healthcare infrastructure and injury patterns may affect performance. This study aims to address this gap by comparing the mortality predictive abilities of ISS and NISS in an Iraqi trauma population. Understanding their relative effectiveness in this context could inform better resource allocation, improve trauma care, and guide future research tailored to local needs.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Trauma

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Trauma patients admitted to the emergency room (ER).
* Patients with documented injury data are sufficient for calculating both the NISS and ISS.
* Patients admitted to the ER within 6 hours of injury.
* Patients providing informed consent (or consent obtained from a legal guardian in cases of incapacity).

Exclusion Criteria

* Patients under 18 years of age.
* Trauma cases involving burns as the primary injury.
* Patients with incomplete medical records or insufficient data to calculate NISS and ISS.
* Patients with pre-existing terminal conditions (e.g., advanced cancer, end-stage organ failure) unrelated to the trauma.
* Patients who died on arrival or before NISS/ISS assessment could be performed.
* Cases involving pregnant patients, if the primary focus of injury and risk assessment is maternal-fetal outcomes.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Al-Nahrain University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Abdul-Ilah R. Khamis

Principal Investigator

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Anees K Nile, Professor of general surgery

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

College Of Medicine - Nahrain University

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

College of Medicine - Al-Nahrain University

Baghdad, , Iraq

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Iraq

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Abdulillah R. Khamees

Role: CONTACT

+9647838571013

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Abdulillah R. Khamees

Role: primary

+9647838571013

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Palmer CS, Gabbe BJ, Cameron PA. Defining major trauma using the 2008 Abbreviated Injury Scale. Injury. 2016 Jan;47(1):109-15. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2015.07.003. Epub 2015 Jul 10.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 26283084 (View on PubMed)

Pape HC, Halvachizadeh S, Leenen L, Velmahos GD, Buckley R, Giannoudis PV. Timing of major fracture care in polytrauma patients - An update on principles, parameters and strategies for 2020. Injury. 2019 Oct;50(10):1656-1670. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.09.021. Epub 2019 Sep 13.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 31558277 (View on PubMed)

Whitaker IY, Gennari TD, Whitaker AL. The difference between ISS and NISS in a series of trauma patients in Brazil. Annu Proc Assoc Adv Automot Med. 2003;47:301-9.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 12941232 (View on PubMed)

Hoke MH, Usul E, Ozkan S. Comparison of Trauma Severity Scores (ISS, NISS, RTS, BIG Score, and TRISS) in Multiple Trauma Patients. J Trauma Nurs. 2021 Apr-Jun 01;28(2):100-106. doi: 10.1097/JTN.0000000000000567.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 33667204 (View on PubMed)

Jamulitrat S, Sangkerd P, Thongpiyapoom S, Na Narong M. A comparison of mortality predictive abilities between NISS and ISS in trauma patients. J Med Assoc Thai. 2001 Oct;84(10):1416-21.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 11804251 (View on PubMed)

Deng Q, Tang B, Xue C, Liu Y, Liu X, Lv Y, Zhang L. Comparison of the Ability to Predict Mortality between the Injury Severity Score and the New Injury Severity Score: A Meta-Analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016 Aug 16;13(8):825. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13080825.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 27537902 (View on PubMed)

Tohira H, Jacobs I, Mountain D, Gibson N, Yeo A. Systematic review of predictive performance of injury severity scoring tools. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2012 Sep 10;20:63. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-20-63.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 22964071 (View on PubMed)

Rio TGGND, Nogueira LS, Lima FR, Cassiano C, Garcia DFV. Performance of severity indices for admission and mortality of trauma patients in the intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study. Eur J Med Res. 2023 Dec 4;28(1):559. doi: 10.1186/s40001-023-01532-6.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 38049903 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

UNCOMIRB20241122

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Trauma Heart to Arm Time
NCT01210417 COMPLETED