We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In this study, we aimed to evaluate the correlation between the trauma score of individuals wounded in the Lushan earthquake and emergency workload for treatment. We further created a trauma score-emergency workload calculation model.
Methods:
We included data from patients wounded in the Lushan earthquake and treated at West China Hospital, Sichuan University. We calculated scores per the following models separately: Revised Trauma Score (RTS), Prehospital Index (PHI), Circulation Respiration Abdominal Movement Speech (CRAMS), Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS-28), and Nursing Activities Score (NAS). We assessed the association between values for CRAMS, PHI, and RTS and those for TISS-28 and NAS. Subsequently, we built a trauma score-emergency workload calculation model to quantitative workload estimation.
Results:
Significant correlations were observed for all pairs of trauma scoring models with emergency workload scoring models. TISS-28 score was significantly associated with PHI score and RTS; however, no significant correlation was observed between the TISS-28 score and CRAMS score.
Conclusions:
CRAMS, PHI, and RTS were consistent in evaluating the injury condition of wounded individuals; TISS-28 and NAS scores were consistent in evaluating the required treatment workload. Dynamic changes in emergency workload in unit time were closely associated with wounded patient visits.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.