Citation

Tiziani S, Hinkle AJ, Mesarick EC, Turner AC, Kenfack YJ, Dumas RP, Grewal IS, Park C, Sanders DT, Sathy AK, Starr AJ. J. Orthop. Trauma 2023; 37(11S): S23-S27.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2023, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins)

DOI

10.1097/BOT.0000000000002690

PMID

37828698

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The extent and timing of surgery in severely injured patients remains an unsolved problem in orthopaedic trauma. Different laboratory values or scores have been used to try to predict mortality and estimate physiological reserve. The Parkland Trauma Index of Mortality (PTIM) has been validated as an electronic medical record-integrated algorithm to help with operative timing in trauma patients. The aim of this study was to report our initial experience with PTIM and how it relates to other scores.

METHODS: A retrospective chart review of level 1 and level 2 trauma patients admitted to our institution between December 2020 and November 2022 was conducted. Patients scored with PTIM with orthopaedic injuries were included in this study. Exclusion criteria were patients younger than 18 years.

RESULTS: Seven hundred seventy-four patients (246 female patients) with a median age of 40.5 (18-101) were included. Mortality was 3.1%. Patients in the PTIM high-risk category (≥0.5) had a 20% mortality rate. The median PTIM was 0.075 (0-0.89) and the median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 9.0 (1-59). PTIM (P < 0.001) and ISS (P < 0.001) were significantly lower in surviving patients. PTIM was mentioned in 7.6% of cases, and in 1.7% of cases, providers indicated an action in response to the PTIM. PTIM and ISS were significantly higher in patients with documented PTIM.

CONCLUSION: PTIM is better at predicting mortality compared with ISS. Our low rate of PTIM documentation in provider notes highlights the challenges of implementing a new algorithm. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Language: en