Menu
Not yet recruiting NCT06699641

The Kampala Trauma Score in the Outcome of Polytrauma Patients

Observational Polytrauma Patients

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
This is an observational study: the protocol does not assign a study treatment.
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Polytrauma Patients. Basic parameters: 18 years — 60 years · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →
Official title

Cmparison Between the Kampala Trauma Score and the Estimated Injury Severity Score in the Outcome of Polytrauma Patients in the Emergency Departments in Egypt.

Overview

The goal of this observational study is to learn about the predictive value of the Kampala Trauma Score in Egypt. The main question it aims to answer is: How does the performance of the Kampala Trauma Score compare to the Estimated Injury Severity Score in predicting outcomes for multi-traumatic patients in Egypt? Participants are adult polytrauma patients admitted to the emergency department during the study period.

Detailed description

Two prominent scoring systems used in trauma care are the Kampala Trauma Score (KTS) and the Estimated Injury Severity Score (EISS). The KTS was specifically designed for use in low-resource settings, offering a practical tool for predicting patient outcomes based on readily available clinical data. This score integrates parameters such as age, systolic blood pressure, and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores, making it suitable for environments where advanced diagnostic tools may be lacking. Previous research has demonstrated the KTS's utility in various resource-limited settings, highlighting its role in effectively stratifying trauma patients and guiding triage decisions.

In contrast, the Estimated Injury Severity Score (EISS) is an adaptation of the Injury Severity Score (ISS), which incorporates both clinical and radiographic data to assess trauma severity comprehensively. The EISS uses an estimated approach to account for the often incomplete or preliminary information available in some clinical settings, aiming to provide a robust prediction of patient outcomes. While it is a more comprehensive tool than the KTS, its reliance on advanced imaging and detailed clinical information may limit its applicability in settings with restricted resources.

This study aims to conduct a cross-sectional comparison of the KTS and EISS to evaluate their relative effectiveness in assessing trauma severity and predicting patient outcomes. The results will provide valuable insights into the optimal use of trauma scoring systems and potentially inform improvements in trauma care practices

Primary outcome measures

  • Outcome of polytrauma patients as assessed by the Kampala Trauma Score [Time frame: From admission to 24 hours post admission]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • Adult polytrauma patients
  • Both genders

Exclusion criteria

  • Patients with incomplete data or those who decline participation.
  • Patients with multiple comorbidities.
  • Patients managed outside the hospital.

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: No

Study design

Observational model
Case-only

Study locations

Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.

Identifiers

NCT: NCT06699641 · The Kampala Trauma Score value

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗