Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 19, 2026

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
Published on: October 23, 2020
Survival prediction algorithms miss significant opportunities for improvement if used for case selection in trauma
Catherine Heim1, Elaine Cole2, Anita West3
1Department of Anaesthesiology CHUV, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Background:
Quality improvement (QI) programs have shown to reduce preventable mortality in trauma care. Detailed review of all trauma deaths is a time and resource consuming process and calculated probability of survival (Ps) has been proposed as audit filter. Review is limited on deaths that were 'expected to survive'. However no Ps-based algorithm has been validated and no study has examined elements of preventability associated with deaths classified as 'expected'. The objective of this study was to examine whether trauma performance review can be streamlined using existing mortality prediction tools without missing important areas for improvement.
Methods:
We conducted a retrospective study of all trauma deaths reviewed by our trauma QI program. Deaths were classified into non-preventable, possibly preventable, probably preventable or preventable. Opportunities for improvement (OPIs) involve failure in the process of care and were classified into clinical and system deviations from standards of care. TRISS and PS were used for calculation of probability of survival. Peer-review charts were reviewed by a single investigator.
Results:
Over 8 years, 626 patients were included. One third showed elements of preventability and 4% were preventable. Preventability occurred across the entire range of the calculated Ps band. Limiting review to unexpected deaths would have missed over 50% of all preventability issues and a third of preventable deaths. 37% of patients showed opportunities for improvement (OPIs). Neither TRISS nor PS allowed for reliable identification of OPIs and limiting peer-review to patients with unexpected deaths would have missed close to 60% of all issues in care.
Conclusions:
TRISS and PS fail to identify a significant proportion of avoidable deaths and miss important opportunities for process and system improvement. Based on this, all trauma deaths should be subjected to expert panel review in order to aim at a maximal output of performance improvement programs.
More Related Videos
06:46Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
07:31Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Cancer Survival Analysis
Assumptions of Survival Analysis
Survival Tree
Building a Survival Tree
Constructing a...
Introduction To Survival Analysis
The primary goal of survival analysis is to estimate survival time—the time...
Survival Curves
The Kaplan-Meier estimator is the most common method for constructing survival curves. This...