Journals / Turkish Neurosurgery / 2016 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 5

Glasgow Coma Scale Versus Full Outline of UnResponsiveness Scale for Prediction of Outcomes in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury in the Intensive

Pages
720–724
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

CONCLUSION: FOUR score is a valuable, sensitive and specific diagnostic criterion for predicting outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injuries.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:AIM: Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is the most applied tool for classifying intensity of coma and predicting patient outcomes with traumatic brain injuries.
📊
Key Findings & Data:MATERIAL and METhODS: In this prospective study, 198 patients with traumatic brain injuries were investigated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONCLUSION: FOUR score is a valuable, sensitive and specific diagnostic criterion for predicting outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injuries.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

AIM: Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is the most applied tool for classifying intensity of coma and predicting patient outcomes with traumatic brain injuries. The present study was conducted with the aim of comparing two criteria of Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) scale and GCS in predicting prognosis in patients with traumatic brain injuries. MATERIAL and METhODS: In this prospective study, 198 patients with traumatic brain injuries were investigated. FOUR and GCS criteria for each patient were determined by four well-educated nurses. The area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was determined for in-hospital mortality outcomes. RESULTS: Of all patients, 65.2% survived and 34.8% died, and FOUR had correctly predicted 82% of them. FOUR had 0.76 sensitivity and GCS had a sensitivity 0.85. Mean scores for mortality and survival rates were 4.59±2.36 and 10.71±2.24 in GCS, and 3.15±3.52 and 12.77±2.43 in FOUR, respectively. The area under ROC curve was 0.961 for FOUR and 0.928 for GCS. The area under the curve was high for FOUR in scores 6 and 7, and for GCS in scores 5 and 6. CONCLUSION: FOUR score is a valuable, sensitive and specific diagnostic criterion for predicting outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injuries.

🔖

Cite This Article

SEPAHVAND, E., JALALI, R., MIRZAEI, M., EBRAHIMZADEH, F., AHMADI, M., AMRAII, E. (2022). Glasgow Coma Scale Versus Full Outline of UnResponsiveness Scale for Prediction of Outcomes in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury in the Intensive. Turkish Neurosurgery, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 5, 720–724. https://ajindex.com/articles/616946

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Akavipat P, Sookplung P, Kaewsingha P, Maunsaiyat P: Prediction of discharge outcome with the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) score in neurosurgical patients. Acta Med Okayama 65: 205-210, 2011 2. Bruno M, Ledox D, Lambermont B, Damas F, Schnakers C, Vanhaudenhuyse A, Gosseries O, Laureys S: Comparison of the full outline of unresponsiveness and glasgow liege scale/ Glasgow coma scale in an intensive care unit population. Neurocrit Care 15:447-453, 2011 3. Carolei A, Sacco S: The FOUR score: A reliable instrument to assess the comatose stroke patient. Eur Neural 63:370-371, 2010 4. Chan M, Mattar I, Taylor B J: Investigating factors that have an impact on nurses 'performance of patients' conscious level assessment: a systematic review. J Nursing Manag 21: 31-46, 2013 5. Chen B, Grothe CH, Schaller K: Validation of a new neurological score (FOUR Score) in the assessment of neurosurgical patients with severely impaired consciousness. Acta Neurochir 155:2133-2139, 2013 6. Fischer M, Reugg S, Czaplinski A, Strohmeier M, Lehmann A, Tschan F, Hunziker P, Marsch S: Interrater reliability of the full outline of unresponsiveness score and Glasgow coma scale in critically ill patients: A prospective observational study. Neurocrit Care 14: R64, 2010 7. Foreman BP, Caesar R, Parks J, Madden CH, Gentilello L M, Shafi SH, Carlile MC, Harper CR, Diaz-Arrastia RR: Usefulness of the abbreviated injury score and the injury severity score in comparison to the Glasgow Coma Scale in predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury. J Trauma 62:946 -950, 2007 8. Fugate JE, Rabinstein AA, Claassen DO, White RD, Wijdicks EFM: The FOUR score predicts outcome in patients after cardiac arrest. Neurocrit Care 13: 205- 210, 2010 9. Ghayeghran A, Bakhshayesh Eghbali B, Heydarzadeh A: Survey the correlation between F wave persistence and level of consciousness in stroke patients. Journal of Guilan University of Medical Sciences 72:70-76, 2009 10. Idrovo Freire L: The FOUR score: Is it just another new coma scale? Intern Emerg Med 7: 203-204, 2012 11. Idrovo L, Fuentes B, Medina J, Gabaldón L, Ruiz-Ares G, Abenza MJ, Aguilar-Amat MJ, Martínez-Sánchez P, Rodríguez L, Cazorla R, Martínez M, Tafur A, Wijdicks EF, Diez-Tejedor E: Validation of the FOUR score in acute stroke, An Interobserver validity study. Eur Neurol 63: 364-369, 2010 12. Iyer VN, Mandrekar JN, Danielson RD, Zubkov AY, Elmer JL, Wijdicks EF: Validity of the FOUR score coma scale in the medical intensive care unit.