Limits of the Glasgow Coma Scale When Assessing for Sepsis in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: The well-documented association between acute mental status changes and sepsis development and progression makes acute mental status an attractive factor for sepsis screening tools. However, the usefulness of acute mental status within these criteria is limited to the frequency and accuracy of its capture. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score-the acute mental status indicator in many clinical sepsis criteria-is infrequently captured among allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients with suspected infections, and its ability to serve as an indicator of acute mental status among this high-risk population is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the GCS score as an indicator of acute mental status during the 24 hours after suspected infection onset among allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients. METHODS: Using data from the first 100 days posttransplant for patients transplanted at a single center between September 2010 and July 2017, we evaluated the GCS score as an indicator of documented acute mental status during the 24 hours after suspected infection onset. From all inpatients with suspected infections, we randomly selected a cohort based on previously published estimates of GCS score frequency among hematopoietic cell transplant recipients with suspected infections and performed chart review to ascertain documentation of clinical acute mental status within the 24 hours after suspected infection onset. RESULTS: A total of 773 patients had ≥1 suspected infections and experienced 1,655 suspected infections during follow-up-625 of which had an accompanying GCS score. Among the randomly selected cohort of 100 persons with suspected infection, 28 were accompanied with documented acute mental status, including 18 without a recorded GCS. In relation to documented acute mental status, the GCS had moderate to high sensitivity and high specificity. DISCUSSION: These data indicate that, among allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients with suspected infections, the GCS scores are infrequently collected and have a moderate sensitivity. If sepsis screening tools inclusive of acute mental status changes are to be used, nursing teams need to increase measurement of GCS scores among high sepsis risk patients or identify a standard alternative indicator.

Data quality of Glasgow Coma Scale and Systolic Blood Pressure in scientific studies involving physician-staffed emergency medical services: Systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Emergency physicians on-scene provide highly specialized care to severely sick or injured patients. High-quality research relies on the quality of data, but no commonly accepted definition of EMS data quality exits. Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) and Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) are core physiological variables, but little is known about the quality of these data when reported in p-EMS research. This systematic review aims to describe the quality of pre-hospital reporting of GCS and SBP data in studies where emergency physicians are present on-scene. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Medline, Norart, Scopus, SweMed + and Web of Science, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Reported data on accuracy of reporting, completeness and capture were extracted to describe the quality of documentation of GCS and SBP. External and internal validity assessment was performed by extracting a set of predefined variables. RESULTS: We included 137 articles describing data collection for GCS, SBP or both. Most studies (81%) were conducted in Europe and 59% of studies reported trauma cases. Reporting of GCS and SBP data were not uniform and may be improved to enable comparisons. Of the predefined external and internal validity data items, 26%-45% of data were possible to extract from the included papers. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of GCS and SBP is variable in scientific papers. We recommend standardized reporting to enable comparisons of p-EMS.

The Use of Rotterdam CT Score for Prediction of Outcomes in Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury Patients Admitted to Emergency Service.

INTRODUCTION: Rotterdam CT score for prediction of outcome in traumatic brain injury is widely used for patient evaluation. The data on the assessment of pediatric traumatic brain injury patients with the Rotterdam scale in our country are still limited. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the use of the Rotterdam scale on pediatric trauma patients in our country and assess its relationship with lesion type, location and severity, trauma type, and need for surgery. METHODS: A total of 229 pediatric patients admitted to the emergency service due to head trauma were included in our study. Patients were evaluated in terms of age, gender, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), initial and follow-up Rotterdam scale scores, length of stay, presence of other traumas, seizures, antiepileptic drug use, need for surgical necessity, and final outcome. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients were included in the study, and the mean age of the patients was 95.8 months. Of the patients, 87 (38%) were girls and 142 (62%) were boys. Regarding GCS at the time of admission, 59% (n = 135) of the patients had mild (GCS = 13-15), 30.6% (n = 70) had moderate (GCS = 9-12), and 10.5% (n = 24) had severe (GCS < 9) head trauma. The mean Rotterdam scale score was calculated as 1.51 (ranging from 1 to 3) for mild, 2.22 (ranging from 1 to 4) for moderate, and 4.33 (ranging from 2 to 6) for severe head trauma patients. Rotterdam scale score increases significantly as the degree of head injury increases (p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: With the adequate use of GCS and cerebral computed tomography imaging, pediatric patients with a higher risk of mortality and need for surgery can be predicted. We recommend the follow-up of pediatric traumatic brain injury patients with repeated CT scans to observe alterations in Rotterdam CT scores, which may be predictive for the need for surgery and intensive care.

Derivation and validation of an easy-to-compute trauma score that improves prognostication of mortality or the Trauma Rating Index in Age, Glasgow Coma Scale, Respiratory rate and Systolic blood pressure (TRIAGES) score.

BACKGROUND: Multiple trauma scores have been developed and validated, including the Revised Trauma Score (RTS) and the Mechanism, Glasgow Coma Scale, Age, and Arterial Pressure (MGAP) score. However, these scores are complex to calculate or have low prognostic abilities for trauma mortality. Therefore, we aimed to develop and validate a trauma score that is easier to calculate and more accurate than the RTS and the MGAP score. METHODS: The study was a retrospective prognostic study. Data from patients registered in the Japan Trauma Databank (JTDB) were dichotomized into derivation and validation cohorts. Patients' data from the Clinical Randomisation of an Antifibrinolytic in Significant Haemorrhage-2 (CRASH-2) trial were assigned to another validation cohort. We obtained age and physiological variables at baseline, created ordinal variables from continuous variables, and defined integer weighting coefficients. Score performance to predict all-cause in-hospital death was assessed using the area under the curve in receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) analyses. RESULTS: Based on the JTDB derivation cohort (n = 99,867 with 12.5% mortality), the novel score ranged from 0 to 14 points, including 0-2 points for age, 0-6 points for the Glasgow Coma Scale, 0-4 points for systolic blood pressure, and 0-2 points for respiratory rate. The AUROC of the novel score was 0.932 for the JTDB validation cohort (n = 76,762 with 10.1% mortality) and 0.814 for the CRASH-2 cohort (n = 19,740 with 14.6% mortality), which was superior to RTS (0.907 and 0.808, respectively) and MGAP score (0.918 and 0.774, respectively) results. CONCLUSIONS: We report an easy-to-use trauma score with better prognostication ability for in-hospital mortality compared to the RTS and MGAP score. Further studies to test clinical applicability of the novel score are warranted.

An International survey on diagnostic and prognostic protocols in patients with disorder of consciousness.

To date, no international guidelines or recommendations for diagnosis or prognosis of patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) have been established. The International Brain Injury Association's (IBIA) Special Interest Group on Disorders of Consciousness (DoC-SIG) launched an international multicenter survey to compare diagnostic and prognostic procedures across countries and clinical settings. Objectives: To explore which specific diagnostic protocols and prognostic indices were utilized in the care for persons with DoC in different countries and to determine the usage, if any, of national guidelines in the care of such patients. Methods: The questionnaire included 17 questions in two distinct sections (I - clinical and instrumental tools and involvement of caregivers and II - clinical, anamnestic and instrumental markers). Results: Physicians composed 50% of the survey respondents (120) and were all involved in post-acute rehabilitation care. In the majority of countries, respondents reported that there were no national guidelines or recommendations for DoC care. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) were the most frequently used clinical scales for diagnostic purposes. The majority of respondents reported the involvement of caregivers in the evaluation of behavioral responsiveness of patient with DoC. The survey indicated that only a few centers performed neurophysiological investigations routinely as diagnostic instrumental procedures. Our results suggest that international guidelines and recommendations for the care of persons with DoC still need to be formulated and ideally agreed to by consensus.

Validation of the Chinese version of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R).

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: This study aims to validate the Chinese version of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R). METHODS: One hundred sixty-nine patients were assessed with both the CRS-R and the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), diagnosed as being in unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS, formerly known as vegetative state), minimally conscious state (MCS), or emergence from MCS (EMCS). A subgroup of 50 patients has been assessed twice by the same rater, within 24 h. Patient outcome was documented six months after assessment. RESULTS: The internal consistency for the CRS-R total score was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.84). Good test-retest reliability was obtained for CRS-R total score and subscale scores (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.87 and ICC = 0.66-0.84, respectively). Inter-rater reliability was high (ICC = 0.719; p < 0.01). Concurrent validity was good between CRS-R total scale and GCS total scale. Diagnostic validity was excellent compared with GCS (emerged from UWS: 24%; emerged from MCS: 28%). When considering patient outcome, diagnostic validity was good. In addition, false-positive rates have been detected for both diagnoses. CONCLUSION: The Chinese version of the CRS-R is a reliable and sensitive tool and can discriminate patients in UWS, MCS, and EMCS successfully.

International survey on diagnostic and prognostic procedures in pediatric disorders of consciousness.

AIMS: 1. to investigate diagnostic and prognostic procedures routinely used by international professionals to assess children with disorders of consciousness (DoC); 2. to explore use and availability of internal and national guidelines for pediatric DoC; 3. to identify international differences in diagnostic/prognostic protocols. METHODS: The International Brain Injury Association DoC Special Interest Group emailed a survey link to 43,469 professionals. The survey included questions on diagnostic/prognostic procedures and guidelines for children with DoC. RESULTS: Data on 82 respondents [(50% physicians) primarily from Europe (43.9%)and North America (37.8%)] were analyzed. Common diagnostic tools included the Glasgow Coma Scale for clinical assessment (94%), the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised for outcome measurement (57%), and cerebral MRI (94%). Clinical features used most frequently to inform prognosis varied with patient age. Few respondents used national (28%) admission protocols for children with DoC, and most were unaware of published national guidelines for diagnostic (72%) and prognostic (85%) procedures. Compared to North American respondents, more European respondents were physicians and used neurophysiological data for prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: This international survey provides useful information about diagnostic and prognostic procedures currently used for children with DoC and highlights the need for guidelines to promote best practices for diagnosis/prognosis in pediatric DoC.

Multidisciplinary attentive treatment for patients with chronic disorders of consciousness following severe traumatic brain injury in the NASVA of Japan.

Primary Objective: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the clinical outcomes of long-term multidisciplinary attentive treatment (MAT) in patients with chronic disorders of consciousness (DOC) due to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) following automotive accidents.Research Design: Five hundred and ten patients (mean age: 40.4 years) were enrolled in this retrospective study.Methods and Procedures: Patients were provided MAT for one to several years in the eight medical facilities of the National Agency for Automotive Safety and Victims' Aid (NASVA) in Japan. Clinical status for consciousness, communication, and activities of daily living were evaluated using the NASVA grading system.Outcomes and results: Following MAT, NASVA scores at discharge were significantly improved compared to those at admission in every patient subgroup including sex, age, NASVA score, and association with/without hypoxic encephalopathy at admission. Younger age, shorter interval between injury and admission, and better neurocognitive function at admission were found to be significant and independent factors for a good prognosis.Conclusions: MAT can partially improve the cognitive and physical abilities of patients with chronic DOC. From the perspective of not only restoring a patient's daily life, but also reducing the caregiver's burden, this type of treatment program warrants more public attention.

Traumatic Retroclival Epidural Hematoma.

Retroclival epidural hematomas are particularly rare conditions that are frequently the result of high-energy, hyperflexion-hyperextension injuries in pediatric patients. We present the case of a 7-year-old previously healthy girl with traumatic retroclival epidural hematoma after a fall from a swing. She presented with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15 with severe neck pain and limitation of cervical movements in all directions. Radiological examination revealed retroclival epidural hematoma, and the patient was managed conservatively with good recovery. Although conservative management leads to good recovery in most cases, retroclival epidural hematomas should always be kept in mind regardless of the severity of trauma.

Development and Validation of a Grading Scale for Primary Pontine Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We aimed to develop and validate a grading scale for predicting 30-day mortality and 90-day functional outcome in patients with primary pontine hemorrhage (PPH). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records of consecutive patients with first-ever pontine hemorrhage from 3 teaching hospitals between 2005 and 2012. Independent factors associated with 30-day mortality were identified by logistic regression to establish a risk stratification scale, named the new PPH score. For validation of the new PPH score, we prospectively recruited subjects from 10 units between December 2014 and November 2015. The performance of the new PPH score was presented as discrimination and calibration, measured by area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic and Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit, respectively. RESULTS: Data of 171 patients were available for scale development. The new PPH score consisted of 2 independent factors with individual points assigned as follows: Glasgow Coma Scale score 3 to 4 (=2 points), 5 to 7 (=1 point), and 8 to 15 (=0 point); PPH volume >10 mL (=2 points), 5 to 10 mL (=1 point), and <5 mL (=0 point). An independent cohort of 98 patients was applied as an external validation of the new PPH score. Results showed that the new PPH score was discriminative in predicting both 30-day mortality (area under the curve, 0.902) and 90-day good outcome (area under the curve, 0.927). Furthermore, the new PPH score revealed a good calibration (χ2=1.387; P=0.846) in 30-day mortality prediction. CONCLUSIONS: The new PPH score is simple and reliable in predicting short-term and long-term outcome for PPH patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.chictr.org.cn. Unique identifier: ChiCTR-OOC-14005533.

Predictive Utility of the Total Glasgow Coma Scale Versus the Motor Component of the Glasgow Coma Scale for Identification of Patients With Serious Traumatic Injuries.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The motor component of the Glasgow Coma Scale (mGCS) has been proposed as an easier-to-use alternative to the total GCS (tGCS) for field assessment of trauma patients by emergency medical services. We perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the predictive utility of the tGCS versus the mGCS or Simplified Motor Scale in field triage of trauma for identifying patients with adverse outcomes (inhospital mortality or severe brain injury) or who underwent procedures (neurosurgical intervention or emergency intubation) indicating need for high-level trauma care. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, and the Cochrane databases were searched through June 2016 for English-language cohort studies. We included studies that compared the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of the tGCS versus the mGCS or Simplified Motor Scale assessed in the field or shortly after arrival in the emergency department for predicting the outcomes described above. Meta-analyses were performed with a random-effects model, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: We included 18 head-to-head studies of predictive utility (n=1,703,388). For inhospital mortality, the tGCS was associated with slightly greater discrimination than the mGCS (pooled mean difference in [AUROC] 0.015; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.009 to 0.022; I2=85%; 12 studies) or the Simplified Motor Scale (pooled mean difference in AUROC 0.030; 95% CI 0.024 to 0.036; I2=0%; 5 studies). The tGCS was also associated with greater discrimination than the mGCS or Simplified Motor Scale for nonmortality outcomes (differences in AUROC from 0.03 to 0.05). Findings were robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: The tGCS is associated with slightly greater discrimination than the mGCS or Simplified Motor Scale for identifying severe trauma. The small differences in discrimination are likely to be clinically unimportant and could be offset by factors such as convenience and ease of use.

Predictive Validity and Inter-Rater Reliability of the Persian Version of Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Among Unconscious Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury in an Intensive Care Unit.

INTRODUCTION: The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) has some limitations when evaluating the unconscious patient. This study aims to validate the Persian version of the FOUR (Full Outline of Unresponsiveness) score as a proposed substitute. METHODS: Two nurses, two nursing students, and two physicians scored the prepared Persian version of the FOUR and GCS in 84 patients with acute brain injury. The inter-rater agreement for the FOUR and the GCS scores was evaluated by the weighted kappa (κ w). The outcome prediction power of the scales was assessed by the area under the curve (AUC) in the ROC curve. RESULTS: The inter-rater agreement of the FOUR was excellent (κ w = 0.923, 95 % CI, 0.874-0.971) and comparable with the one of the GCS (κ w = 0.938, 95 % CI, 0.889-0.987). The area under the curve (AUC) for predicting in-hospital mortality (modified Rankin Scale: 6) was 0.835 for the FOUR (95 % CI, 0.739-0.907) and 0.772 for the GCS (95 % CI, 0.668-0.856) (P = 0.01). AUC for predicting poor outcome (modified Rankin Scale: 3-6) for the total FOUR score was 0.983 (95 % CI, 0.928-0.999), which is comparable with 0.987 for the total GCS score (95 % CI, 0.934-1.000). CONCLUSIONS: The researchers conclude that the Persian version of the FOUR score is a reliable and valid scale to assess unconscious patients with traumatic brain injury and can be substituted for the GCS.

Validation of the 9-Point and 24-Point Hematoma Expansion Prediction Scores and Derivation of the PREDICT A/B Scores.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Nine- and 24-point prediction scores have recently been published to predict hematoma expansion (HE) in acute intracerebral hemorrhage. We sought to validate these scores and perform an independent analysis of HE predictors. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 301 primary or anticoagulation-associated intracerebral hemorrhage patients presenting <6 hours post ictus prospectively enrolled in the Predicting Hematoma Growth and Outcome in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Using Contrast Bolus Computed Tomography (PREDICT) study. Patients underwent baseline computed tomography angiography and 24-hour noncontrast computed tomography follow-up for HE analysis. Discrimination and calibration of the 9- and 24-point scores was assessed. Independent predictors of HE were identified using multivariable regression and incorporated into the PREDICT A/B scores, which were then compared with existing scores. RESULTS: The 9- and 24-point HE scores demonstrated acceptable discrimination for HE>6 mL or 33% and >6 mL, respectively (area under the curve of 0.706 and 0.755, respectively). The 24-point score demonstrated appropriate calibration in the PREDICT cohort (χ2 statistic, 11.5; P=0.175), whereas the 9-point score demonstrated poor calibration (χ2 statistic, 34.3; P<0.001). Independent HE predictors included spot sign number, time from onset, warfarin use or international normalized ratio>1.5, Glasgow Coma Scale, and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and were included in PREDICT A/B scores. PREDICT A showed improved discrimination compared with both existing scores, whereas performance of PREDICT B varied by definition of expansion. CONCLUSIONS: The 9- and 24-point expansion scores demonstrate acceptable discrimination in an independent multicenter cohort; however, calibration was suboptimal for the 9-point score. The PREDICT A score showed improved discrimination for HE prediction but requires independent validation.

Randomized controlled trial of a scoring aid to improve Glasgow Coma Scale scoring by emergency medical services providers.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Emergency medical services (EMS) personnel frequently use the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) to assess injured and critically ill patients. This study assesses the accuracy of EMS providers' GCS scoring, as well as the improvement in GCS score assessment with the use of a scoring aid. METHODS: This randomized, controlled study was conducted in the emergency department (ED) of an urban academic trauma center. Emergency medical technicians or paramedics who transported a patient to the ED were randomly assigned one of 9 written scenarios, either with or without a GCS scoring aid. Scenarios were created by consensus of expert attending emergency medicine, EMS, and neurocritical care physicians, with universal consensus agreement on GCS scores. χ(2) And Student's t tests were used to compare groups. RESULTS: Of 180 participants, 178 completed the study. Overall, 73 of 178 participants (41%) gave a GCS score that matched the expert consensus score. GCS score was correct in 22 of 88 (25%) cases without the scoring aid. GCS was correct in 51 of 90 (57%) cases with the scoring aid. Most (69%) of the total GCS scores fell within 1 point of the expert consensus GCS score. Differences in accuracy were most pronounced in scenarios with a correct GCS score of 12 or below. Subcomponent accuracy was eye 62%, verbal 70%, and motor 51%. CONCLUSION: In this study, 60% of EMS participants provided inaccurate GCS score estimates. Use of a GCS scoring aid improved accuracy of EMS GCS score assessments.

Glasgow Coma Scale Scoring is Often Inaccurate.

INTRODUCTION: The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is widely applied in the emergency setting; it is used to guide trauma triage and for the application of essential interventions such as endotracheal intubation. However, inter-rater reliability of GCS scoring has been shown to be low for inexperienced users, especially for the motor component. Concerns regarding the accuracy and validity of GCS scoring between various types of emergency care providers have been expressed. Hypothesis/Problem The objective of this study was to determine the degree of accuracy of GCS scoring between various emergency care providers within a modern Emergency Medical Services (EMS) system. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of the accuracy of GCS scoring using a convenience sample of various types of emergency medical providers using standardized video vignettes. Ten video vignettes using adults were prepared and scored by two board-certified neurologists. Inter-rater reliability was excellent (Cohen's κ = 1). Subjects viewed the video and then scored each scenario. The scoring of subjects was compared to expert scoring of the two board-certified neurologists. RESULTS: A total of 217 emergency providers watched 10 video vignettes and provided 2,084 observations of GCS scoring. Overall total GCS scoring accuracy was 33.1% (95% CI, 30.2-36.0). The highest accuracy was observed on the verbal component of the GCS (69.2%; 95% CI, 67.8-70.4). The eye-opening component was the second most accurate (61.2%; 95% CI, 59.5-62.9). The least accurate component was the motor component (59.8%; 95% CI, 58.1-61.5). A small number of subjects (9.2%) assigned GCS scores that do not exist in the GCS scoring system. CONCLUSIONS: Glasgow Coma Scale scoring should not be considered accurate. A more simplified scoring system should be developed and validated.

Glasgow Coma Scale for outcome prediction after cardiac surgery: is it applicable?

OBJECTIVES: The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is used commonly for assessing patients' neurologic condition and outcome in intensive care units (ICUs); however, its reliability in cardiac surgical patients has been questioned. It has been claimed that active sedation is the cause of its unsuitability for these patients. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of GCS in cardiac surgical patients with and without active sedation to find out if the inapplicability of GCS in surgical patients is related to active sedation. DESIGN: This was an observational cohort study. SETTING: The study was conducted in a cardiac surgical intensive care unit between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2009. PARTICIPANTS: All consecutive adult cardiac surgical patients were included in this study. INTERVENTIONS: All types of cardiac surgical procedures performed during the study period were included without any exceptions. The study population was divided into 2 groups: sedated and non-sedated. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: GCS was calculated daily for the first 7 postoperative days. The authors developed a new 4-point neurologic descriptor (ND): (1) neurologically free, (2) ICU psychosis, (3) actively sedated, and (4) documented focal neurologic deficits. The accuracy of both scales (GCS and ND) at predicting ICU mortality was compared by replacing the GCS in the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score with the new ND, producing a modified SOFA. GCS was not an accurate outcome predictor in non-sedated or sedated patients. The ND was superior to GCS. Correspondingly, the modified SOFA showed a significantly higher accuracy of ICU-mortality prediction than the original SOFA. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of active sedation, GCS is not accurate at outcome prediction for cardiac surgical patients. The suggested ND is a simple and more accurate risk stratification variable in cardiac surgical ICUs.

The FOUR score and GCS as predictors of outcome after traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is a routine component of a neurological exam for critically ill traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients, yet has been criticized for not accurately depicting verbal status among intubated patients or including brain stem reflexes. Preliminary research on the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) Scale suggests it overcomes these limitations. Research is needed to determine correlations with patient outcomes. The aims of this study were to: (1) examine correlations between 24 and 72 h FOUR and GCS scores and functional/cognitive outcomes; (2) determine relationship between 24 and 72 h FOUR scores and mortality. METHODS: Prospective cohort study. Data gathered on adult TBI patients at a Level I trauma center. FOUR scores assigned at 24, 72 h. Functional outcome measured by functional independence measure scores at rehabilitation discharge; cognitive status measured by Weschler Memory Scale scores 3 months post-injury. RESULTS: n = 136. Mean age 53.1. 72 h FOUR and GCS scores correlated with functional outcome (r s = 0.34, p = 0.05; r s = 0.39, p = 0.02), but not cognitive status. Receiver operating characteristic curves were comparable for FOUR and GCS at 24 and 72 h for functional status (24 h FOUR, GCS = 0.625, 0.602, respectively; 72 h FOUR, GCS = 0.640, 0.688), cognitive status (24 h FOUR, GCS = 0.703, 0.731; 72 h FOUR, GCS = 0.837, 0.674), and mortality (24 h FOUR, GCS = 0.913, 0.935; 72 h FOUR, GCS = 0.837, 0.884). CONCLUSIONS: FOUR is comparable to GCS in terms of predictive ability for functional status, cognitive outcome 3 months post-injury, and in-hospital mortality.

Glasgow coma scale: how to improve and enhance documentation.

The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is an international tool used to measure the level of consciousness for traumatically injured patients. One Level I and 3 Level II Trauma Centers in our Health Care System perceived a deficiency in the documentation of the GCS. An audit was performed and insufficient documentation was confirmed. An educational plan was developed and implemented to improve documentation. A reaudit was performed to determine the success of these interventions. Although improvement was demonstrated, additional action was taken to enhance documentation in the electronic medical record.

Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury in Adult Population: The Latin American Brain Injury Consortium Consensus for Definition and Categorization.

Moderate traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a diagnosis that describes diverse patients with heterogeneity of primary injuries. Defined by a Glasgow Coma Scale between 9 and 12, this category includes patients who may neurologically worsen and require increasing intensive care resources and/or emergency neurosurgery. Despite the unique characteristics of these patients, there have not been specific guidelines published before this effort to support decision-making in these patients. A Delphi consensus group from the Latin American Brain Injury Consortium was established to generate recommendations related to the definition and categorization of moderate TBI. Before an in-person meeting, a systematic review of the literature was performed identifying evidence relevant to planned topics. Blinded voting assessed support for each recommendation. A priori the threshold for consensus was set at 80% agreement. Nine PICOT questions were generated by the panel, including definition, categorization, grouping, and diagnosis of moderate TBI. Here, we report the results of our work including relevant consensus statements and discussion for each question. Moderate TBI is an entity for which there is little published evidence available supporting definition, diagnosis, and management. Recommendations based on experts' opinion were informed by available evidence and aim to refine the definition and categorization of moderate TBI. Further studies evaluating the impact of these recommendations will be required.