ArticleCureus2024
Revisiting Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity (POSSUM) and Portsmouth-POSSUM (P-POSSUM) Scores: Are They Valid in Cases of Ileal Perforation?
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Efficacy of POSSUM and P-POSSUM Scoring Systems in Predicting Outcomes of Emergency Gastrointestinal Surgeries.Oman medical journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Ileal perforation due to typhoid is common in tropical countries, and the ensuing secondary peritonitis is treated by resuscitation and surgery. The Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity (POSSUM) was developed to predict postoperative outcomes to overcome systemic obstacles in any healthcare setup and is considered fairly accurate. The Portsmouth-POSSUM (P-POSSUM) score was developed as a corrective scoring system for overestimations made by the POSSUM score vis-à-vis mortality. Our study aimed to examine the validity of these two scores in the postoperative prediction of surgical outcomes in patients with ileal perforation. Materials and methods An observational study involving 40 patients diagnosed with ileal perforations was undertaken over 18 months. The postoperative outcome for each patient was calculated as per the POSSUM and P-POSSUM parameters. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) and the results were tabulated. Results We found that age, gender, respiratory dysfunction, propensity for multiple surgeries, duration of surgery, co-morbidities, underlying malignancy, and systolic blood pressure played a significant role in determining postoperative outcomes. Haemoglobin, potassium, and urea levels were also found to be significantly associated with outcome. Cardiac signs, pulse, white blood cell count, Glasgow Coma Scale score, sodium, and electrocardiography, part of the physiological score parameters, were found to be insignificant in the prediction of postoperative outcomes. Among the intraoperative parameters, peritoneal soiling was found to be insignificant. Conclusion Some parameters inherent to POSSUM and P-POSSUM calculations appear to bear no statistical significance to the final score, highlighting that these need to be revisited and perhaps modified to further simplify the calculation. The POSSUM score is an excellent predictor of postoperative morbidity and mortality in ileal perforation patients but is of questionable reliability due to its tendency to overestimate them. P-POSSUM has a better predictive power of postoperative mortality by correcting POSSUM mortality overestimation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.