Heterogeneity in defining multiple trauma: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
Authors' conclusion
This systematic review uncovers an important heterogeneity both in the terms and in the definitions employed to recruit trauma patients within RCTs.
Study context
- Population
- Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and RCT protocols including multiple trauma patients (MEDLINE, EMBASE, clinicaltrials.gov, 2002–2022)
- Participants
- 50 RCTs
- Outcome
- Terminology and definitions used to characterise multiple trauma patients in RCTs
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Terms and definitions used
- Different terms identified
- 12
- "multiple trauma"
- n = 21, 42%
- "severe trauma"
- n = 8, 16%
- "major trauma"
- n = 4, 8%
- Trauma with hemorrhagic shock
- n = 4, 8%
- RCTs providing a definition
- 62% (n = 31)
- Different definitions
- 21
- Definitions relying on injury severity score (ISS)
- n = 15, 30%
Further pooled results
RCT protocols
- Protocols included
- 11
- Different terms
- 5
- "severe trauma" most frequent
- 6 (55%)
Original publication
Heterogeneity in defining multiple trauma: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Crit Care. Published 22 September 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →