Abstract

Background. Neurological assessment is an essential element of early warning scores used to recognize critically ill patients. We compared the performance of the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) with Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) scale as an alternative method in the identification of clinically relevant outcomes in traumatic brain injury. Objective. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of GCS with FOUR scale. Methods. For this study 104 patients with brain injury were recruited from the ICU of Taleghani Hospital, a major teaching hospital in Kermanshah in the western part of Iran. Data was collected concurrently from the ICU admissions by three well-educated nurses and then checked for accuracy by the researcher. Patients were followed up until two weeks or hospital discharge to record their survival status. As a final point expected risk of mortality was calculated using the original formulas for each scale. Results. The mean age of 104 participants was 41.38 ± 18.22 (rang 17 to 86 years) mostly (81 patients 77.9%) males. The FOUR scale has a better prediction for death than GCS. Conclusion. It appears that FOUR scale had better predictive power for mortality and may be a suitable alternative or complementary tool for GCS.

Highlights

  • Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the major causes of death and severe disability worldwide

  • The Youden index showed that Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) scale (45.7%) has a better prediction for death than Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) (32.0%)

  • Means of scores in dead and alive patients for GCS were 4.62 ± 2.094 and 6.58 ± 2.281, and for FOUR they were 4.7 ± 3.471 and 8.42 ± 2.925, respectively. t-test showed a significant difference between means of the alive and dead subjects in both scales (P < 0.0001)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the major causes of death and severe disability worldwide. There has been growing interest in scoring systems for measuring the severity of illness and predicting outcomes in critically ill patients since 1974 [4]. The GCS in the appendix was adopted to enhance communication among practitioners by providing a common language for assessing the depth and duration of impaired consciousness and coma [6] Since it has become the gold standard against which newer scales are compared. We compared the performance of the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) with Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) scale as an alternative method in the identification of clinically relevant outcomes in traumatic brain injury.

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call