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.
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
188 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2025-09-15
2026-04-15
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:
How accurately do EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP scores predict mortality in trauma patients?
How effective are these scores in predicting the need for endotracheal intubation?
How well do these scores correlate with hospitalization duration in trauma patients?
Participants will:
Be assessed using EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP scores upon admission to the emergency department.
Have their clinical outcomes, including survival, intubation requirements, and length of hospital stay, monitored throughout their hospitalization.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Accuracy and External Validation of mREMS in Road Traffic Injuries
NCT06740409
Evaluation of Resuscitation Markers in Trauma Patients
NCT02772653
Trauma Reception and Resuscitation Project
NCT00164034
Comparison of End-tidal Carbon Dioxide (ETCO2) Measured by Transportable Capnometer (EMMATM) and the Arterial pCO2 in General Anesthesia
NCT02184728
Non-invasive Airway Management of Comatose Poisoned Emergency Patients
NCT04653597
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Efficient risk stratification plays an important role in managing trauma patients, particularly in emergency settings where delays in treatment can have fatal outcomes. Early identification of severely injured individuals supports timely referral and initiation of interventions, both of which are consistently associated with reduced morbidity and mortality.
A wide range of trauma scoring systems have been developed to estimate injury severity, guide triage decisions, and predict outcomes. Yet many established scores, such as the Injury Severity Score and the Trauma and Injury Severity Score, depend on detailed anatomical information that is often unavailable during the critical early phase of emergency care. Others, such as the Revised Trauma Score, are based on physiological indicators but are more complex and may not fully incorporate factors like age or specific injury types. Similarly, scoring systems such as the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II rely on laboratory values, making them less suitable for rapid use in emergency departments.
This limitation becomes even more evident in low and middle income countries, where resource constraints, limited access to complete medical records, and varying trauma patterns make it difficult to apply many existing scoring tools. The need for simple, reliable, and rapid assessment tools that can be applied at the point of care in these environments is especially urgent.
This study focuses on three trauma scores that can be applied early in a patient's clinical course and require only minimal resources: the Emergency Trauma Score, the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score, and the Glasgow Coma Scale Age Pressure score.
The Emergency Trauma Score was developed to estimate the risk of mortality in adult trauma patients using four parameters: age, Glasgow Coma Scale, base excess, and prothrombin time. These values are typically available within 30 minutes of arrival in the emergency department, and this score does not depend on anatomical injury data, making it suitable for early prognostic assessment. The Rapid Emergency Medicine Score is a simplified version of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and includes the Glasgow Coma Scale, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, and age. Although originally developed for patients with non-traumatic conditions this score has demonstrated promising predictive ability in trauma populations as well. A modified version of this score, known as the modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score, was later created to optimize performance in trauma patients. This version adjusts the weight given to age and the Glasgow Coma Scale and replaces mean arterial pressure with systolic blood pressure. The Glasgow Coma Scale Age Pressure score is derived from the Mechanism Glasgow Coma Scale Age Pressure score by removing the mechanism of injury component. It focuses exclusively on physiological variables, specifically Glasgow Coma Scale, age, and systolic blood pressure. The score can be calculated quickly based on a patient's initial clinical status and vital signs, making it especially well-suited for use in settings with limited resources. Previous studies have shown that it has strong predictive ability for mortality.
Although these trauma scores have demonstrated potential, most validation studies have been conducted in high income countries or through single-center retrospective designs. To increase generalizability and relevance to diverse healthcare environments, there is a need for prospective multicenter research, particularly in settings with limited resources and infrastructure.
This current study presents a multicenter prospective cohort analysis from Iraq, a country facing a substantial burden of trauma and significant healthcare challenges. This research compares the accuracy of the Emergency Trauma Score, Rapid Emergency Medicine Score, and Glasgow Coma Scale Age Pressure score in predicting in-hospital mortality among adult trauma patients. The findings aim to offer evidence-based insights that could improve trauma triage and clinical decision-making in resource-constrained environments.
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
* Patients or their legal guardians must provide informed consent to participate in the study.
* Admission within 12 hours of injury.
Exclusion Criteria
* Pregnant patients (due to specific physiological considerations not accounted for by the scoring system).
* Patients who died before arrival or were declared dead on arrival.
* Patients who refuse participation or for whom informed consent cannot be obtained.
16 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: backup
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Rehn M, Perel P, Blackhall K, Lossius HM. Prognostic models for the early care of trauma patients: a systematic review. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2011 Mar 20;19:17. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-19-17.
WHO Global Health Estimates. INJURIES VIOLENCE THE FACTS.; 2014.https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/149798/9789241508018_eng.pdf?sequence=1
Whitaker J, O'Donohoe N, Denning M, Poenaru D, Guadagno E, Leather AJM, Davies JI. Assessing trauma care systems in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and evidence synthesis mapping the Three Delays framework to injury health system assessments. BMJ Glob Health. 2021 May;6(5):e004324. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004324.
Granstrom A, Schandl A, Martensson J, Strommer L. Using the GAP score as a complement to the NISS score in identifying severely injured patients- A registry-based cohort study of adult trauma patients in Sweden. Injury. 2024 Sep;55(9):111709. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2024.111709. Epub 2024 Jun 28.
GJRA - Global Journal for Research Analysis - Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) as a prognostic marker and its comparison with traditional scoring systems in trauma. (n.d.). https://www.worldwidejournals.com/global-journal-for-research-analysis-GJRA/file.php?val=diagnostic-accuracy-of-rapid-emergency-medicine-score-rems-as-a-prognostic-marker-and-its-comparison-with-traditional-scoring-systems-in-trauma_January_2023_7615446958_8010945.pdf
Karakus A, Yilmaz S, Demirci S, et al. An evaluation of trauma scores (RTS, GAP, EMTRAS) on mortality in multiple trauma patients. J Emerg Med. 2023;65(1):1-8. doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2023.04.012
Phunghassaporn N, Sukhvibul P, Techapongsatorn S, Tansawet A. Accuracy and external validation of the modified rapid emergency medicine score in road traffic injuries in a Bangkok level I trauma center. Heliyon. 2022 Dec 10;8(12):e12225. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12225. eCollection 2022 Dec.
Joosse P, de Jong WJ, Reitsma JB, Wendt KW, Schep NW, Goslings JC. External validation of the Emergency Trauma Score for early prediction of mortality in trauma patients. Crit Care Med. 2014 Jan;42(1):83-9. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31829e53f5.
Mangini, M., Di Valvasone, S., Greco, C., Ognibene, A., Cappuccini, G., Spina, R., Tartaglia, R., Zagli, G., & Peris, A. (2010). Validation of the new proposed Emergency Trauma Score (EMTRAS). Critical Care, 14(Suppl 1), P252. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc8484
Kumar, G., Kaur, R., Yadav, R., & Kachru, N. (2022). Comparison of Emergency Trauma Score (EMTRAS) with Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) for Prediction of Early Mortality in Adult Trauma Patients. Archives of Anesthesia and Critical Care. https://doi.org/10.18502/aacc.v8i3.9608
Park HO, Kim JW, Kim SH, Moon SH, Byun JH, Kim KN, Yang JH, Lee CE, Jang IS, Kang DH, Kim SC, Kang C, Choi JY. Usability verification of the Emergency Trauma Score (EMTRAS) and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) in patients with trauma: A retrospective cohort study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 Nov;96(44):e8449. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008449.
Imhoff BF, Thompson NJ, Hastings MA, Nazir N, Moncure M, Cannon CM. Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) in the trauma population: a retrospective study. BMJ Open. 2014 May 2;4(5):e004738. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004738.
Miller RT, Nazir N, McDonald T, Cannon CM. The modified rapid emergency medicine score: A novel trauma triage tool to predict in-hospital mortality. Injury. 2017 Sep;48(9):1870-1877. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.04.048. Epub 2017 Apr 25.
Olsson T, Terent A, Lind L. Rapid Emergency Medicine score: a new prognostic tool for in-hospital mortality in nonsurgical emergency department patients. J Intern Med. 2004 May;255(5):579-87. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2004.01321.x.
Kumar G, Kaur R, Yadav R, Kachru N. Comparison of Emergency Trauma Score (EMTRAS) with Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) for prediction of early mortality in adult trauma patients. Arch Anesthesiol Crit Care. 2022;8(3):193-200.
Ahun E, Koksal O, Sigirli D, Torun G, Donmez SS, Armagan E. Value of the Glasgow coma scale, age, and arterial blood pressure score for predicting the mortality of major trauma patients presenting to the emergency department. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2014 Jul;20(4):241-7. doi: 10.5505/tjtes.2014.76399.
Mohammed S, Ali Y, Hasan M, et al. Trauma care in Iraq: challenges and opportunities. BMC Emerg Med. 2022;22:90. doi:10.1186/s12873-022-00653-1
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
UNCOMIRB2025934
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.