湖南师范大学学报（医学版）
湖南師範大學學報（醫學版）
호남사범대학학보（의학판）
Journal of Hunan Normal University (Medical Science)
2015年
4期
117-120
,共4页
林萍%叶莲妹%陈霞%苏振云%兰仕亮%欧东晨
林萍%葉蓮妹%陳霞%囌振雲%蘭仕亮%歐東晨
림평%협련매%진하%소진운%란사량%구동신
创伤评分法%口腔颌面损伤%颌面骨折%功能损伤
創傷評分法%口腔頜麵損傷%頜麵骨摺%功能損傷
창상평분법%구강합면손상%합면골절%공능손상
Trauma score method%Oral and maxillofacial injury%Maxillofacial fracture%Injury
目的：比较四种创伤评分法对口腔颌面损伤的评分，探讨口腔颌面损伤评价的最佳评分方法。方法：回顾性分析我院收治的80例颌面部骨折患者临床资料，分析致伤原因、骨折部位和损伤数量；并分别采用创伤严重度评分（injury severity score,ISS）、新损伤严重度评分（new injury severity score,NISS）、改良创伤严重度评分（revised injury severity score,RISS）和颌面损伤严重度评分（Maxillofacial Injury Severity Score,MISS）对患者创伤严重程度进行评分。结果：按骨折部位分组评分：上颌骨骨折、下颌骨骨折、颧骨骨折在 NISS、RISS 两种评分标准下得分差异无统计学意义；颧骨骨折在 ISS、NISS 评分标准下得分差异无统计学意义；其余各组间得分相比差异均具有统计学意义。按损伤数量分组评分：单处骨折、双处骨折在 NISS、RISS 评分标准下得分差异均无统计学意义；其余各组间评分相比差异均具有统计学意义。结论：MISS 评分法不仅能区分损伤的严重程度，还能评价功能的损伤程度，具有更高的特异性和灵敏度，更适用于口腔颌面外科损伤评价。
目的：比較四種創傷評分法對口腔頜麵損傷的評分，探討口腔頜麵損傷評價的最佳評分方法。方法：迴顧性分析我院收治的80例頜麵部骨摺患者臨床資料，分析緻傷原因、骨摺部位和損傷數量；併分彆採用創傷嚴重度評分（injury severity score,ISS）、新損傷嚴重度評分（new injury severity score,NISS）、改良創傷嚴重度評分（revised injury severity score,RISS）和頜麵損傷嚴重度評分（Maxillofacial Injury Severity Score,MISS）對患者創傷嚴重程度進行評分。結果：按骨摺部位分組評分：上頜骨骨摺、下頜骨骨摺、顴骨骨摺在 NISS、RISS 兩種評分標準下得分差異無統計學意義；顴骨骨摺在 ISS、NISS 評分標準下得分差異無統計學意義；其餘各組間得分相比差異均具有統計學意義。按損傷數量分組評分：單處骨摺、雙處骨摺在 NISS、RISS 評分標準下得分差異均無統計學意義；其餘各組間評分相比差異均具有統計學意義。結論：MISS 評分法不僅能區分損傷的嚴重程度，還能評價功能的損傷程度，具有更高的特異性和靈敏度，更適用于口腔頜麵外科損傷評價。
목적：비교사충창상평분법대구강합면손상적평분，탐토구강합면손상평개적최가평분방법。방법：회고성분석아원수치적80례합면부골절환자림상자료，분석치상원인、골절부위화손상수량；병분별채용창상엄중도평분（injury severity score,ISS）、신손상엄중도평분（new injury severity score,NISS）、개량창상엄중도평분（revised injury severity score,RISS）화합면손상엄중도평분（Maxillofacial Injury Severity Score,MISS）대환자창상엄중정도진행평분。결과：안골절부위분조평분：상합골골절、하합골골절、권골골절재 NISS、RISS 량충평분표준하득분차이무통계학의의；권골골절재 ISS、NISS 평분표준하득분차이무통계학의의；기여각조간득분상비차이균구유통계학의의。안손상수량분조평분：단처골절、쌍처골절재 NISS、RISS 평분표준하득분차이균무통계학의의；기여각조간평분상비차이균구유통계학의의。결론：MISS 평분법불부능구분손상적엄중정도，환능평개공능적손상정도，구유경고적특이성화령민도，경괄용우구강합면외과손상평개。
ObjectiveComparison of four kinds of trauma score method for oral and maxillofacial injury, to explore the best score method to evaluate the oral maxillofacial injury. MethodsRetrospective analysis of 80 cases of maxillofacial fracture patients clinical data selected in our hospital, analysed the cause of injury, the parts and damage number of fracture.ISS, NISS, RISS and MISS methods was taken to evaluated injury severity. Results Evaluated by fracture site:fracture of maxilla, mandible fracture, fracture of zygomatic bone in the NISS, RISS difference with no statistically significant, zygomatic fracture in standard NISS ISS score difference with no statistically significant; other groups compared to score differences were statistically signifi-cance. Accorded by number of packets:single fracture, double fracture in RISS, NISS score with no statistically significant; other groups were compared the differences were statistically significant. ConclusionMISS score method not only to distinguish the injury severity, but also can evaluation damage degree,has higher specificity and sensitivity, more suitable for evaluating the damage of oral and maxillofacial damage.
