We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
EVALUATION STUDIES
JOURNAL ARTICLE
A comparison of five simplified scales to the out-of-hospital Glasgow Coma Scale for the prediction of traumatic brain injury outcomes.
Academic Emergency Medicine 2006 September
BACKGROUND: The 15-point Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) frequently is used in the initial evaluation of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in out-of-hospital settings. We hypothesized that the GCS might be unnecessarily complex for out-of-hospital use.
OBJECTIVES: To assess whether a simpler scoring system might demonstrate similar accuracy in the prediction of TBI outcomes.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a trauma registry consisting of patients evaluated at our Level 1 trauma center from 1990 to 2002. The ability of out-of-hospital GCS scores to predict four clinically relevant TBI outcomes (emergency intubation, neurosurgical intervention, brain injury, and mortality) by using areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) was calculated. The same analyses for five simplified scales were performed, and compared with the predictive accuracies of the total GCS score.
RESULTS: In this evaluation of 7,233 trauma patients over a 12-year period of time, the AUROCs for the total GCS score were 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.81 to 0.84) for emergency intubation, 0.86 (95% CI = 0.85 to 0.88) for neurosurgical intervention, 0.83 (95% CI = 0.82 to 0.84) for brain injury, and 0.89 (95% CI = 0.88 to 0.90) for mortality. The five simplified scales approached the performance of the total GCS score for all clinical outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: In the evaluation of injured patients, five simplified neurological scales approached the performance of the total GCS score for the prediction of four clinically relevant TBI outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: To assess whether a simpler scoring system might demonstrate similar accuracy in the prediction of TBI outcomes.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a trauma registry consisting of patients evaluated at our Level 1 trauma center from 1990 to 2002. The ability of out-of-hospital GCS scores to predict four clinically relevant TBI outcomes (emergency intubation, neurosurgical intervention, brain injury, and mortality) by using areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) was calculated. The same analyses for five simplified scales were performed, and compared with the predictive accuracies of the total GCS score.
RESULTS: In this evaluation of 7,233 trauma patients over a 12-year period of time, the AUROCs for the total GCS score were 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.81 to 0.84) for emergency intubation, 0.86 (95% CI = 0.85 to 0.88) for neurosurgical intervention, 0.83 (95% CI = 0.82 to 0.84) for brain injury, and 0.89 (95% CI = 0.88 to 0.90) for mortality. The five simplified scales approached the performance of the total GCS score for all clinical outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: In the evaluation of injured patients, five simplified neurological scales approached the performance of the total GCS score for the prediction of four clinically relevant TBI outcomes.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app