排序方式: 共有4条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1
1.
Belinda J. Gabbe Pam M. Simpson Ronan A. Lyons Shanthi Ameratunga James E. Harrison Sarah Derrett Suzanne Polinder Gabrielle Davie Frederick P. Rivara 《PloS one》2014,9(12)
Objective
To determine associations between the number of injuries sustained and three measures of disability 12-months post-injury for hospitalised patients.Methods
Data from 27,840 adult (18+ years) participants, hospitalised for injury, were extracted for analysis from the Validating and Improving injury Burden Estimates (Injury-VIBES) Study. Modified Poisson and linear regression analyses were used to estimate relative risks and mean differences, respectively, for a range of outcomes (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended, GOS-E; EQ-5D and 12-item Short Form health survey physical and mental component summary scores, PCS-12 and MCS-12) according to the number of injuries sustained, adjusted for age, sex and contributing study.Findings
More than half (54%) of patients had an injury to more than one ICD-10 body region and 62% had sustained more than one Global Burden of Disease injury type. The adjusted relative risk of a poor functional recovery (GOS-E<7) and of reporting problems on each of the items of the EQ-5D increased by 5–10% for each additional injury type, or body region, injured. Adjusted mean PCS-12 and MCS-12 scores worsened with each additional injury type, or body region, injured by 1.3–1.5 points and 0.5 points, respectively.Conclusions
Consistent and strong relationships exist between the number of injury types and body regions injured and 12-month functional and health status outcomes. Existing composite measures of anatomical injury severity such as the NISS or ISS, which use up to three diagnoses only, may be insufficient for characterising or accounting for multiple injuries in disability studies. Future studies should consider the impact of multiple injuries to avoid under-estimation of injury burden. 相似文献2.
Sarah Derrett Suzanne Wilson Ari Samaranayaka John Langley Emma Wyeth Shanthi Ameratunga Rebbecca Lilley Gabrielle Davie Melbourne Mauiliu 《PloS one》2013,8(11)
Introduction
Most studies investigating disability outcomes following injury have examined hospitalised patients. It is not known whether variables associated with disability outcomes are similar for injured people who are not hospitalised.Aims
This paper compares the prevalence of disability 24 months after injury for participants in the Prospective Outcomes of Injury Study who were hospitalised and those non-hospitalised, and also seeks to identify pre-injury and injury-related predictors of disability among hospitalised and non-hospitalised participants.Methods
Participants, aged 18–64 years, were recruited from an injury claims register managed by New Zealand’s no-fault injury compensation insurer after referral by health care professionals. A wide range of pre-injury socio-demographic, health and psychosocial characteristics were collected, as well as injury-related characteristics; outcome is assessed using the WHODAS. Multivariable models estimating relative risks of disability for hospitalised and non-hospitalised participants were developed using Poisson regression methods.Results
Of 2856 participants, analyses were restricted to 2184 (76%) participants for whom both pre-injury and 24 month WHODAS data were available. Of these, 25% were hospitalised. In both hospitalised and non-hospitalised groups, 13% experience disability (WHODAS≥10) 24 months after injury; higher than pre-injury (5%). Of 28 predictor variables, seven independently placed injured participants in the hospitalised group at increased risk of disability 24 months after injury; eight in the non-hospitalised. Only four predictors (pre-injury disability, two or more pre-injury chronic conditions, pre-injury BMI≥30 and trouble accessing healthcare services) were common to both the hospitalised and non-hospitalised groups. There is some evidence to suggest that among the hospitalised group, Māori have higher risk of disability relative to non-Māori.Conclusions
At 24 months considerable disability is borne, equally, by hospitalised and non-hospitalised groups. However, predictors of disability are not necessarily consistent between the hospitalised and non-hospitalised groups, suggesting caution in generalising results from one group to the other. 相似文献3.
Selby Katherine A. Roe Helen M. Wright Alexander J. van de Plassche Orson Derrett Sally R. 《Vegetation History and Archaeobotany》2022,31(2):137-154
Vegetation History and Archaeobotany - Pollen and plant macrofossils are often well-preserved in coastal sediments, providing a palaeoenvironmental record of sea-level and landscape change. In this... 相似文献
4.
Sarah Derrett Ari Samaranayaka Suzanne Wilson John Langley Shanthi Ameratunga Ian D. Cameron Rebbecca Lilley Emma Wyeth Gabrielle Davie 《PloS one》2012,7(9)
Introduction
To reduce the burden on injury survivors and their supporters, factors associated with poor outcomes need to be identified so that timely post-injury interventions can be implemented. To date, few studies have investigated outcomes for both those who were hospitalised and those who were not.Aim
To describe the prevalence and to identify pre-injury and injury-related predictors of disability among hospitalised and non-hospitalised people, three months after injury.Methods
Participants in the Prospective Outcomes of Injury Study were aged 18–64 years and on an injury entitlement claims register with New Zealand''s no-fault injury compensation insurer, following referral by healthcare professionals. A wide range of pre-injury demographic, health and injury-related characteristics were collected at interview. Participants were categorised as ‘hospitalised’ if they were placed on New Zealand''s National Minimum Data Set within seven days of the injury event. Injury severity scores (NISS) and 12 injury categories were derived from ICD-10 codes. WHODAS assessed disability. Multivariable analyses examined relationships between explanatory variables and disability.Results
Of 2856 participants, 2752 (96%) had WHODAS scores available for multivariable analysis; 673 were hospitalised; 2079 were not. Disability was highly prevalent among hospitalised (53.6%) and non-hospitalised (39.4%) participants, three-months after injury. In both groups, pre-injury disability, obesity and higher injury severity were associated with increased odds of post-injury disability. A range of other factors were associated with disability in only one group: e.g. female, ≥2 chronic conditions and leg fracture among hospitalised; aged 35–54 years, trouble accessing healthcare, spine or lower extremity sprains/dislocations and assault among non-hospitalised.Significance
Disability was highly prevalent among both groups yet, with a few exceptions, factors associated with disability were not common to both groups. Where possible, including a range of injured people in studies, hospitalised and not, will increase understanding of the burden of disability in the sub-acute phase. 相似文献
1