Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT07186777
NCT07186777RecruitingNot Applicable

Comparative Predictive Accuracy of EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP Scores for Mortality, Endotracheal Intubation, and Length of Hospitalization in Trauma Patients: The First Prospective Cohort Study From Iraq

Al-Nahrain University1 site in 1 country188 target enrollmentStarted: September 15, 2025Last updated:

Trial Snapshot

Phase
Not Applicable
Status
Recruiting
Sponsor
Enrollment
188
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Accuracy Assessment of EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP Scores in Predicting In-Hospital Mortality

Study Overview

Brief Summary

The goal of this prospective multicenter cohort study is to evaluate and compare the predictive utility of the EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP scores in determining key outcomes among trauma patients admitted to participating hospitals in Iraq. The primary outcomes of interest include mortality, the need for endotracheal intubation, and length of hospitalization.

The main questions it aims to answer are:

How accurately do EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP scores predict mortality in trauma patients?

How effective are these scores in predicting the need for endotracheal intubation?

How well do these scores correlate with hospitalization duration in trauma patients?

Participants will:

Be assessed using EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP scores upon admission to the emergency department.

Have their clinical outcomes, including survival, intubation requirements, and length of hospital stay, monitored throughout their hospitalization.

Detailed Description

Trauma continues to pose a major global public health challenge, accounting for millions of deaths and disabilities each year, with low and middle income countries bearing a disproportionately high burden . Studies suggest that injuries will rise further among the leading causes of mortality, with road traffic accidents, falls, and suicide being among the most prevalent contributors. Approximately 90 percent of trauma deaths occur in low and middle income settings, and a significant portion of these fatalities are considered preventable with the appropriate care.

Efficient risk stratification plays an important role in managing trauma patients, particularly in emergency settings where delays in treatment can have fatal outcomes. Early identification of severely injured individuals supports timely referral and initiation of interventions, both of which are consistently associated with reduced morbidity and mortality.

A wide range of trauma scoring systems have been developed to estimate injury severity, guide triage decisions, and predict outcomes. Yet many established scores, such as the Injury Severity Score and the Trauma and Injury Severity Score, depend on detailed anatomical information that is often unavailable during the critical early phase of emergency care. Others, such as the Revised Trauma Score, are based on physiological indicators but are more complex and may not fully incorporate factors like age or specific injury types. Similarly, scoring systems such as the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II rely on laboratory values, making them less suitable for rapid use in emergency departments.

This limitation becomes even more evident in low and middle income countries, where resource constraints, limited access to complete medical records, and varying trauma patterns make it difficult to apply many existing scoring tools. The need for simple, reliable, and rapid assessment tools that can be applied at the point of care in these environments is especially urgent.

This study focuses on three trauma scores that can be applied early in a patient's clinical course and require only minimal resources: the Emergency Trauma Score, the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score, and the Glasgow Coma Scale Age Pressure score.

Study Design

Study Type
Observational
Observational Model
Cohort
Time Perspective
Prospective

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
16 Years to — (Child, Adult, Older Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No

Inclusion Criteria

  • Patients presenting to the emergency department with trauma.
  • Patients or their legal guardians must provide informed consent to participate in the study.
  • Admission within 12 hours of injury.

Exclusion Criteria

  • Patients with incomplete clinical data or those discharged before scoring can be performed.
  • Pregnant patients (due to specific physiological considerations not accounted for by the scoring system).
  • Patients who died before arrival or were declared dead on arrival.
  • Patients who refuse participation or for whom informed consent cannot be obtained.

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Accuracy Assessment of EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP Scores in Predicting In-Hospital Mortality

Time Frame: From admission to hospital discharge or death, up to 30 days.

This outcome evaluates the ability of EMTRAS (range 0-12), REMS (range 0-26), and GAP (range 3-24) to predict in-hospital mortality among trauma patients. Higher EMTRAS and REMS scores, and lower GAP scores, are expected to correlate with increased mortality risk.

Secondary Outcomes

  • Accuracy Assessment of EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP Scores in Predicting the Need for Endotracheal Intubation(From emergency department admission to intubation, discharge, or in-hospital death (up to 30 days).)
  • Accuracy Assessment of EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP Scores in Predicting Length of Hospitalization(From hospital admission to discharge, up to 30 days.)
  • Accuracy Assessment of EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP Scores in Predicting In-Hospital Morbidity(From hospital admission to discharge or death, up to 30 days.)

Investigators

Sponsor
Al-Nahrain University
Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Abdulillah R. Khamees

Principal Investigator

Al-Nahrain University

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials