首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     

改良面部损伤严重度评分法评价颌面部创伤1134例
引用本文:葛成,何黎升,GU Xiaoming,顾晓明,周树夏,薄斌. 改良面部损伤严重度评分法评价颌面部创伤1134例[J]. 中华创伤杂志, 2001, 17(5): 275-276
作者姓名:葛成  何黎升  GU Xiaoming  顾晓明  周树夏  薄斌
作者单位:1. 第四军医大学口腔医学院颌面外科,
2. Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Stomatology, Fourth Military Medical University,
摘    要:目的 用损伤严重度评分(ISS)法改良后得到的改良面部ISS(revised facial injury severity score,RFISS)法评价1134例颌面部创伤。方法 将急诊入院的1134例颌面部创伤病例依损伤部位分为颌面部单一伤(A组)、颌面部多处伤(B组)两组,用ISS法和RFISS法分析。结果 ISS法和RFISS法都能判别A组与B组伤情严重度,两组比较,差异有非常显著性意义(P<0.01)。但RFISS更能将伤情严重程度显示出来。另外,在反映损伤处数方面,RFISS法也优于ISS法(P<0.01)。结论 在颌面部损伤严重度研究中,RFISS法有效,且优于ISS法。

关 键 词:面部损伤 损伤严重度评分 颌面部创伤

Preliminary study on scoring methods for maxillofacial injury severity
GU Xiaoming. Preliminary study on scoring methods for maxillofacial injury severity[J]. Chinese Journal of Traumatology, 2001, 17(5): 275-276
Authors:GU Xiaoming
Abstract:Objective To preliminarily study the scoring methods for maxillofacial injury severity. Methods A total of 1 134 patients with maxillofacial trauma emergently accepted in our hospital were analyzed respectively in this study. The patients were divided into two groups, the single injury group (Group A) and the maxillofacial multiple injury group (Group B). These two groups were analyzed with the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the Revised Facial Injury Severity Score (RFISS). Results The injury severities between Group A and Group B were significantly different with both ISS and RFISS (P<0.01 ). But RFISS could express injury severity more effectively. Moreover, the injured sites according to RFISS were much more exact than that according to ISS (P<0.01). Conclusions RFISS outperforms ISS as a numerical injury severity identifier in maxillofacial trauma research.
Keywords:Facial injuries  Injury severity score
本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号