http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
지속적 외래 복막 투석을 위한 도관 삽입술 및 도관 관련 합병증에 대한 연구
곽정면(Jung Myun Kwak),정석인(Suk In Jung),민연기(Youn Ki Min),강석형(Seok Hyung Kang),조용걸(Yong Geul Joh),조민영(Min Young Cho),송태진(Tae Jin Song),이재복(Jae Bok Lee),배정원(Jeoung Won Bae),서성옥(Sung Ok Suh),김영철(Young Chul 대한외과학회 2002 Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research(ASRT) Vol.62 No.2
TRISS method 를 통한 복부외상환자의 예후 비교
정기훈,조용걸,이문섭,엄준원,김남렬,홍윤식 대한외상학회 2000 大韓外傷學會誌 Vol.13 No.1
Purpose: Currently, trauma patients in Korea are treated in general hospitals instead of trauma centers. We performed this study to determine the prognosis for trauma patients through scoring systems and to identify was any difference in outcome between patients treated at two hospitals. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of abdominal trauma patients admitted to the ICU in two hospitals. Hospital A is located in Seoul (800 beds), and Hospital B is located in Kyungju (400 beds). There were 48 abdominal trauma patients in Hospital A from January 1, 1997, to December 31, 1998, and 50 patients in Hospital B from January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1998. The abdominal trauma index (ATI), revised trauma score (RTS), and injury severity score (ISS) of each patient were obtained. TRISS scores and W, Z statistics were then calculated. Results: There were no significant statistical scoring system between survivors and nonsurvivors in either hospital. W score was -0.182 in Hospital A and -9.700 in Hospital B. Z score was -0.193 in Hospital A and -2.011 in Hospital B. Misclassifications of predicted survival and death rates was 16.7% (Hospital A) and 18% (Hospital B) Conclusion : There was not statistic significance to the ATI, RTS, or ISS between survivors and nonsurvivors at either hospital. The TRISS methodology has some limitations for determining differences in outcomes of treatment at the two hospitals.
중환자실에 입원한 외상환자에 있어서의 Scoring system의 의의
정기훈,조용걸,이문섭 대한외상학회 1999 大韓外傷學會誌 Vol.12 No.2
$quot;While trauma injuries cause serious problems for a surgery department, there are few adequate and objective trauma severity indices that assess the severity of trauma patients. In order to find the best prognostic index, the author measured several biological variables in 50 multiple trauma patients of a surgical intensive care units (SICU). We retrospectively studied 50 patients who had admitted to the SICU for multiple traumas at Dongguk University Hospital from January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1998. The scoring systems used were the APACHE III score, the CRAMS scale, the Intensive care unit point (ICUP), the revised trauma score (RTS), the abbre-viated injury scale (AIS), the injury severity score (ISS) and the abdominal trauma index (ATI). We studied the correlation between the scoring system and survival by using the chi-square test. The averages of the scoring systems were ATI 10.98 ±6.02, CRAMS 6.44 ±1.46, APACHE III 27.64 ±14.69, AIS 9.68 ±2.21, ISS 23.6 ±7.45, ICUP 1.82 ±1.69, and RTS 10.52 ±1.36. There were correlations between the scoring system and survival in the APACHE III score (p=0.001), the intensive care unit point (ICUP) (p=0.010), the revised trauma score (RTS)(p=0.007) but not in the abbreviated injury scale (AIS)(p=0.160), the injury severity score (ISS)(p=0.780), the abdominal trauma index (ATI)(p=0.168), and the CRAMS scale (p=0.096). Because of the difficulty and the complexity for applying APACHE III, we conclude that the RTS and the ICUP are very useful predictors for the outcome of trauma patients in a SICU.$quot;