意外伤害住院伤员损伤程度评分法与创伤严重度改良评分法比较  

Comparison between ISS and RISS based on the wounded of accidental injury in hospital

作　　者：杨建新[1] 刘志鹏 张义[3] 席惠君[4] YANG Jianxin LIU Zhipeng ZHANG Yi et al(Bethune International Peace Hospital, Shijiazhuang 050082, Chin)

机构地区：[1]白求恩国际和平医院院办,河北石家庄050082 [2]解放军305医院医务部 [3]第二军医大学卫生勤务学系 [4]第二军医大学长海医院护理部

出　　处：《西北国防医学杂志》2017年第6期364-368,共5页Medical Journal of National Defending Forces in Northwest China

摘　　要：目的:使用创伤严重度改良评分法(RISS)对意外伤害住院伤员伤情严重度进行评估,探讨比较损伤严重程度评分法(ISS)与RISS在意外伤害伤员伤情严重度评估中的优缺点,为伤员伤情评估提供更合适的方法。方法:分别运用ISS和RISS对某医院近年意外伤害伤员2 282例进行评估分析。结果:RISS共涉及损伤部位3 743(93.60%)处;ISS共涉及损伤部位3 140(78.52%)处。在多发伤伤员中,RISS正确评估率为81.85%,ISS正确评估率仅为42.07%。ISS显示,A组与B组,B组与C组,C组与D组均有显著性差异(P<0.05);而RISS显示,A组与B组,C组与D组有显著性差异(P<0.05),B组与C组无显著性差异(P>0.05),更符合实际情况。结论:RISS简单易行,且能客观准确地评估意外伤害伤员中各类损伤的创伤严重度,适合在地质灾害、局部战争、突发事件等灾害后评估伤员伤情严重度。Objective： To compare the advantages and disadvantages of the injury severity score （ISS） and revised injury severity score （RISS） on the wounded of accidental injury, to provide a more appropriate wounded injury assessing method. Methods： A total of 2 282 wounded of accidental injury patients in hospital were evaluated by ISS and RISS.Results：RISS involved 3 743 （93.60%）wounded parts; ISS involved 3 140 （78.52%）wounded parts. RISS assessed 81.85% wounded correctly and ISS only 42.07% with multiple injuries.The group A and group B,group C and group B,group C and group D existed significant difference in ISS scores （P〈0.05）,and the RISS method showed group A and group B,group C and gxoup D had significant difference （P〈0.05）,with no significant difference between group B and group C （P〉0.05）,which were more realistic.Conclusion：RISS is simple and can assess the injury severity of the wounded of accidental objectively and accurately, which fits for assessing accident harm wounded severity.

关 键 词：创伤严重度评分法 意外伤害伤员 创伤严重度改良评分法 

分 类 号：R641[医药卫生—外科学]