Prognostic Factors and Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Major Thoracic Trauma
Rattachement africain : it, ch. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Background: Major thoracic trauma represents a life-threatening condition, requiring a prompt multidisciplinary approach and appropriate pathways for effective recovery. While acute morbidity and mortality are well-known outcomes in thoracic-traumatized patients, long-term quality of life in patients surviving surgical treatment has not been widely investigated before. Methods: Between November 2016 and November 2023, thirty-two consecutive patients were operated on because of thoracic trauma. Age, sex, comorbidities, location and extent of thoracic trauma, Injury Severity Score (ISS), Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS), Organ Injury Scale (OIS), intra and extrathoracic organ involvement, mechanism of injury, type of surgical procedure, postoperative complications, ICU and total length of stay, immediate clinical outcomes and long-term quality of life—by using the EQ-5D-3L scale and Numeric Rate Pain Score (NPRS)—were collected for each patient Results: Results indicated no significant difference in EQOL.5D3L among patients with thoracic trauma based on AIS (p = 0.55), but a significant difference was observed in relation to ISS (p = 0.000011). Conclusions: ISS is correlated with the EQOL.5D3L questionnaire on long-term quality of life, representing the best prognostic factor—in terms of long-term quality of life—in patients surviving major thoracic trauma surgical treatment.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Prognostic Factors and Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Major Thoracic Trauma
- Date Crossref
- 05/06/2024
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.