Study Results
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.
RECRUITING
150 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2025-01-28
2025-12-15
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Which trauma scoring system provides the most accurate prediction of mortality? Are there specific trauma patient subgroups where one scoring system outperforms the others?
Participants will:
Be assessed using all four trauma scoring systems (ISS, NISS, RTS, and TRISS) upon admission to the trauma and emergency department.
Have their clinical outcomes, including mortality, length of hospital stay, ICU admission, and discharge status, monitored throughout their hospital stay to evaluate the accuracy and utility of each scoring system in predicting patient outcomes.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Comparing NISS and ISS for Mortality Prediction in Trauma Patients
NCT06705959
Comparison of RTS and MGAP Scores in Predicting Outcomes of Trauma Patients
NCT06744985
Comparative Analysis of MGAP and GAP Trauma Scores in Predicting Outcomes for Multiple Trauma Patients
NCT06732791
The BIG Score and In-Hospital Trauma Mortality
NCT06574464
Using the GTOS to Stratify the Mortality Risk of Adult Trauma Patients
NCT06475612
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Injury Severity Score (ISS) The Injury Severity Score (ISS) was developed in the 1970s as a way to quantify the severity of trauma-related injuries based on anatomic regions of injury. The ISS assigns scores to the most severe injuries in six body regions, and the sum of the squares of the highest AIS (abbreviated Injury Score) from each of the three most severely injured regions determines the total score. ISS is widely used for risk stratification in trauma patients and has been validated as a predictor of mortality in various populations.
New Injury Severity Score (NISS) The New Injury Severity Score (NISS), introduced in the 1990s, improves upon the ISS by utilizing the three most severe injuries across any body region rather than restricting it to the highest injuries from three predefined regions. Research has shown that NISS is more predictive of mortality than ISS, particularly in patients with polytrauma or multiple severe injuries across different body regions. Despite its advantages, Revised Trauma Score (RTS) The Revised Trauma Score (RTS) is a physiological scoring system based on three clinical parameters: Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and respiratory rate (RR). Unlike ISS and NISS, RTS focuses on the immediate physiological status of the patient rather than the anatomical severity of the injuries. The RTS has been widely used in trauma centers, especially for triage purposes, as it can be quickly assessed in the pre-hospital setting. However, RTS does not account for the type, distribution, or severity of injuries, which can limit its ability to predict mortality in more complex trauma cases.
Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) combines the ISS (or NISS), the RTS, and the patient's age to estimate the probability of survival. TRISS has been widely validated and used in trauma registries as a comprehensive scoring system, considering both injury severity and physiological status. It has been shown to predict trauma-related mortality with good accuracy and is often used to assess trauma system performance and to guide clinical decision-making. However, TRISS may be less accurate in certain populations, such as older adults or those with significant comorbidities, as it primarily relies on injury-related factors and may not fully capture the complex interplay of clinical variables affecting outcomes.
Need for Comparative Studies While individual trauma scoring systems have demonstrated utility in predicting mortality, no single scoring system is universally superior. In clinical practice, there is a need to evaluate and compare these scoring systems across different populations and settings, particularly to determine which system is most reliable in predicting mortality for various trauma mechanisms.
injury patterns, and patient characteristics. Some studies have suggested that combining these systems may improve predictive accuracy, but evidence supporting the superiority of one over the others is inconclusive.
Additionally, while many studies have focused on the predictive validity of these scores in large datasets, fewer studies have compared them head-to-head within the same cohort of trauma patients. This gap in the literature necessitates a comprehensive, cohort-based study that directly compares the performance of the ISS, NISS, RTS, and TRISS for predicting mortality across a broad spectrum of trauma patients.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Documented injury data sufficient to calculate both the New Injury Severity Score (NISS) and the Injury Severity Score (ISS).
* Trauma scores (ISS, NISS, Revised Trauma Score \[RTS\], and Trauma and Injury Severity Score \[TRISS\]) calculated within 12 hour of arrival to ensure timely predictions.
* Informed consent provided by the patient or a legal guardian in cases of incapacity.
Exclusion Criteria
* Non-trauma cases, including patients with terminal illnesses or severe cognitive impairments, to maintain focus on trauma outcomes.
* Incomplete trauma scoring, missing or incomplete medical records, and
* patients not treated in the trauma or emergency department.
* Patients who refuse participation or withdraw consent to ensure ethical participation.
* Transferred patients and those enrolled in other research studies that could interfere with trauma scoring.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Al-Nahrain University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Abdul-Ilah R. Khamis
Principal Investigator
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
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Role: primary
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Senkowski CK, McKenney MG. Trauma scoring systems: a review. J Am Coll Surg. 1999 Nov;189(5):491-503. doi: 10.1016/s1072-7515(99)00190-8. No abstract available.
Champion HR, Sacco WJ, Copes WS, Gann DS, Gennarelli TA, Flanagan ME. A revision of the Trauma Score. J Trauma. 1989 May;29(5):623-9. doi: 10.1097/00005373-198905000-00017.
Baker SP, O'Neill B, Haddon W Jr, Long WB. The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care. J Trauma. 1974 Mar;14(3):187-96. No abstract available.
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.
Boyd CR, Tolson MA, Copes WS. Evaluating trauma care: the TRISS method. Trauma Score and the Injury Severity Score. J Trauma. 1987 Apr;27(4):370-8.
Osler T, Baker SP, Long W. A modification of the injury severity score that both improves accuracy and simplifies scoring. J Trauma. 1997 Dec;43(6):922-5; discussion 925-6. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199712000-00009.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
UNCOMIRB20241123
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.