Retrospective study demonstrates high accuracy of the VNB score for predicting mortality in elderly burn patients, highlighting its utility for rapid clinical risk stratification.
Background Prognostic scoring systems for elderly burn patients may differ from those used in the general burn population because of age-related comorbidities. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic scoring system in elderly burn patients treated at the Vietnam National Burn Hospital. Methods A retrospective descriptive study was conducted involving 648 burn patients aged ≥65 years who were treated at the Department of Emergency and Intensive Care, Vietnam National Burn Hospital. Results The mortality rate was 7.62%. Increasing age, hypertension, deep TBSA, and inhalation injury were independent factors associated with mortality in elderly burn patients ( p < 0.05). The VNB score for prognostic assessment in elderly burn patients was calculated as follows: VNB score = Age + 2 × Deep Burn Area (%TBSA) + 15 × Inhalation Injury +10 × Hypertension. The VNB score showed excellent prognostic performance for mortality, with an AUC of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.91–0.98). At a cut-off of 99 points, sensitivity and specificity were 86.96% and 88.89%, respectively. The model demonstrated good calibration, with a Hosmer-Lemeshow χ 2 = 3.40 ( p = 0.907), a low Brier score (0.03), an observed-to-expected (O: E) ratio of 1.000, and a calibration-in-the-large (CITL) of 0. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed a significant difference in survival probability between patients with a VNB score < 99 and those with a VNB score ≥ 99. Patients with a VNB score ≥ 99 showed a significantly lower survival probability, particularly within the first 20 days after burn injury ( p < 0.001). Conclusion Increasing age, hypertension, deep TBSA, and inhalation injury were independent factors associated with mortality in elderly burn patients ( p < 0.05). The VNB score demonstrated excellent performance in predicting mortality among elderly burn patients (AUC = 0.95).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nguyen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: