Statistical methods to predict morbidity and mortality: self assessment techniques for burn units

Predicting survival in thermal injury: A systematic review of methodology of composite prediction models

“…Four studies analysing prognostic factors without producing composite models [57][58][59][60] and 3 duplicate publications of published models were excluded [61][62][63]. Forty-five original articles describing the construction of models designed specifically for the prediction of mortality in thermally injured patients were included in the review [2,4,13,. The prediction models spanned from 1949 to 2010 with a majority of descriptions originating from burn centres in North America (26) and Europe (10).…”

“…[65,72,96,103]. Three studies produced a curve on which a composite score could be plotted to give a mortality risk [2,67,70]. Five studies produced a multivariable model but did not provide conversion to a risk of mortality [4,68,82,98,99].…”

“…Most descriptions of outcomes in burn care have looked at mortality, primarily because it is easy to define and measure with data available for many decades allowing useful comparison. LOS in patients surviving thermal injury provides an indirect indication of the morbidity and complications, and has a direct correlation with cost of care associated with thermal injury [2][3][4]. The widespread use of LOS as an outcome measure is currently hampered by factors such as lack of standardised criteria constituting discharge following burn care and smaller burns requiring relatively longer admission due to co-morbidities or social circumstances.…”

The Pattern and Outcome of Burn Injuries at a Burn Unit in Saudi Arabia: Retrospective Analysis of Consecutive 501 Patients

“…The low mortality in our population could be attributed to several factors: (1) the dominance of young patients; (2) referral of all patients within hours of the accident; (3) treatment of all patients by trained staff in a specialized burn unit rather than in general surgical wards; and (4) a total burn surface area of less than 15% in 66% of all patients (330 of 501). The error inherent in assessing prognosis based on independent examination of variables rather than in combination has been previously emphasized [20,21].…”

“…The high mortality rate (73%) in patients with inhalation injuries is expected, due to the known deleterious influence of smoke inhalation on respiratory airways, microvascular permeability, and myocardial contractility [20].…”