An Assessment of Clinical Accuracy of Vital Sign–based Triage Tools Among U.S. and Coalition Forces

Tate E Vernon,Michael D April,Andrew D Fisher,Julie A Rizzo,Brit J Long,Steven G Schauer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usad500

2024-01-29

Military Medicine

Abstract:ABSTRACT Introduction Early appropriate allocation of resources for critically injured combat casualties is essential. This is especially important when inundated with an overwhelming number of casualties where limited resources must be efficiently allocated, such as during mass casualty events. There are multiple scoring systems utilized in the prehospital combat setting, including the shock index (SI), modified shock index (MSI), simple triage and rapid treatment (START), revised trauma score (RTS), new trauma score (NTS), Glasgow Coma Scale + age + pressure (GAP), and the mechanism + GAP (MGAP) score. The optimal score for application to the combat trauma population remains unclear. Materials and Methods This is a secondary analysis of a previously described dataset from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry from January 1, 2007 through March 17, 2020. We constructed univariable analyses to determine the area under the receiving operator characteristic (AUROC) for the scoring systems of interest. Our primary outcomes were early death (within 24 hours) or early massive transfusion, as defined by ≥3 units. Results There were 12,268 casualties that met inclusion criteria. There were 168 (1%) who died within the first 24 hours and 2082 (17%) that underwent significant transfusion within the first 24 hours. When assessing the predictive capabilities for death within 24 hours, the AUROCs were 0.72 (SI), 0.69 (MSI), 0.89 (START), 0.90 (RTS), 0.83 (NTS), 0.90 (GAP), and 0.91 (MGAP). The AUROCs for massive transfusion were 0.89 (SI), 0.89 (MSI), 0.82 (START), 0.81 (RTS), 0.83 (NTS), 0.85 (MGAP), and 0.86 (GAP). Conclusions This study retrospectively applied seven triage tools to a database of 12,268 cases from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry to evaluate their performance in predicting early death or massive transfusion in combat. All scoring systems performed well with an AUROC >0.8 for both outcomes. Although the SI and MSI performed best for predicting massive transfusion (both had an AUROC of 0.89), they ranked last for assessment of mortality within 24 hours, with the other tools performing well. START, RTS, NTS, MGAP and GAP reliably identified early death and need for massive transfusion, with MGAP and GAP performing the best overall. These findings highlight the importance of assessing triage tools to best manage resources and ultimately preserve lives of traumatically wounded warfighters. Further studies are needed to explain the surprising performance discrepancy of the SI and MSI in predicting early death and massive transfusion.

medicine, general & internal

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

This paper attempts to address the clinical accuracy of various existing vital sign-based triage tools in predicting early mortality (within 24 hours) and massive transfusion requirements in a military trauma environment. Specifically, the researchers aim to evaluate the performance of these triage tools in a military trauma setting to determine which tool is most suitable for the rapid triage of combat casualties, thereby optimizing resource allocation and improving treatment efficiency. ### Background In mass casualty events, the rational allocation of limited medical resources is crucial for the treatment of severely injured combat casualties. There are various existing triage tools, including the Shock Index (SI), Modified Shock Index (MSI), Simple Triage and Rapid Treatment (START), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), New Trauma Score (NTS), Glasgow Coma Scale + Age + Blood Pressure (GAP), and Mechanism + GAP (MGAP). However, the effectiveness of these tools in a military trauma environment remains unclear. ### Research Objective This study retrospectively analyzes 12,268 cases from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry database to evaluate the performance of these triage tools in predicting early mortality (within 24 hours) and massive transfusion requirements, to determine which tool is most suitable for a military trauma environment. ### Key Findings - **Predicting Early Mortality**: All tools had AUROC values greater than 0.8, indicating good performance in predicting early mortality. Among them, MGAP (AUROC = 0.91) and GAP (AUROC = 0.90) performed the best, while SI (AUROC = 0.72) and MSI (AUROC = 0.69) performed the worst. - **Predicting Massive Transfusion Requirements**: All tools also performed well in predicting massive transfusion requirements, with SI (AUROC = 0.89) and MSI (AUROC = 0.89) performing the best. ### Conclusion Although SI and MSI performed best in predicting massive transfusion requirements, they performed poorly in predicting early mortality. START, RTS, NTS, MGAP, and GAP all performed reliably in predicting both early mortality and massive transfusion requirements, with MGAP and GAP performing the best overall. These findings highlight the importance of evaluating triage tools to optimize resource management and ultimately save the lives of combat casualties. Future research needs to further explain the reasons for the performance differences of SI and MSI in predicting early mortality and massive transfusion requirements.

An Assessment of Clinical Accuracy of Vital Sign–based Triage Tools Among U.S. and Coalition Forces

Application of trauma assessing method to a emergency triage

Early Vital Sign Thresholds Associated with 24-Hour Mortality among Trauma Patients: A Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) Study

Use of Reverse Shock Index Multiplied by Simplified Motor Score in a Five-Level Triage System: Identifying Trauma in Adult Patients at a High Risk of Mortality

Prehospital parameters can help to predict coagulopathy and massive transfusion in trauma patients

Comparative Analysis of META and SALT Disaster Triage in an Adult Trauma Population: A Retrospective Observational Study

Predictive value of the Trauma Rating Index in Age, Glasgow Coma Scale, Respiratory rate and Systolic blood pressure score (TRIAGES) for the short-term mortality of older patients with isolated traumatic brain injury: a retrospective cohort study

An analysis of missed injuries in patients with severe trauma

Predicting Mortality in Trauma Research: Evaluating the Performance of Trauma Scoring Tools in a South African Population

The shock index predicts in-flight blood transfusion in aeromedical trauma patients

Comparison of Five Triage Tools for Identifying Mortality Risk and Injury Severity of Multiple Trauma Patients Admitted to the Emergency Department in the Daytime and Nighttime: A Retrospective Study

Current State of Trauma Care in China, Tools to Predict Death and ICU Admission after Arrival to Hospital

Enhancing Performance of the National Field Triage Guidelines Using Machine Learning: Development of a Prehospital Triage Model to Predict Severe Trauma

Association of the Revised Trauma Score with Mortality and Prehospital LSI Among Trauma and Non-Trauma Patients

Predicting Blood Transfusion Using Automated Analysis of Pulse Oximetry Signals and Laboratory Values

Early Mortality Risk in Acute Trauma Patients: Predictive Value of Injury Severity Score, Trauma Index, and Different Types of Shock Indices

Prediction of Massive Transfusion in Trauma Patients with Shock Index, Modified Shock Index, and Age Shock Index

Massive transfusion prediction with inclusion of the pre-hospital Shock Index

Prediction of Mortality and Outcome of Various Trauma Scores in Polytrauma Patients

RETRACTED: Comparison of Five Triage Tools for Identifying Mortality Risk and Injury Severity of Multiple Trauma Patients Admitted to the Emergency Department in the Daytime and Nighttime: A Retrospective Study (Retracted Article)

Limitations of Triage in Military Mass Casualty Response: A Case Series