Literature DB >> 14747811

Interrater reliability of Glasgow Coma Scale scores in the emergency department.

Michelle R Gill1, David G Reiley, Steven M Green.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: Emergency physicians often use the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) to help guide decisions in patient care, yet the reliability of the GCS has never been tested in a typical broad sample of emergency department (ED) patients. We determined the interrater reliability of the GCS between emergency physicians when adult patients with altered levels of consciousness are assessed.
METHODS: In this prospective observational study at a university Level I trauma center, we enrolled a convenience sample of ED patients older than 17 years who presented with an altered level of consciousness. Two residency-trained attending emergency physicians independently assessed and recorded the GCS score and its components (eye, verbal, and motor) in blinded fashion within a 5-minute period. Data were analyzed for interrater reliability by using standard ordinal calculations. We also created scatter plots and Bland-Altman plots for each GCS component and for the GCS score.
RESULTS: One hundred thirty-one patients were screened and enrolled in the study, with 15 excluded because of protocol violations. Of the 116 remaining patients, the agreement percentage for exact total GCS was 32% (tau-b=0.739; Spearman rho=0.864; Spearman rho2=75%). Agreement percentage for GCS components were eye 74% (tau-b=0.715; Spearman rho=0.757; Spearman rho2=57%), verbal 55% (tau-b=0.587; Spearman rho=0.665; Spearman rho2=44%), and motor 72% (tau-b=0.742; Spearman rho=0.808; Spearman rho2=65%). Our Spearman's analyses found that only approximately half (44% to 65%) of the observed variance could be explained by the relationship between the paired component measures. For GCS components, only 55% to 74% of paired measures were identical, and 6% to 17% of them were 2 or more points apart.
CONCLUSION: We found only moderate degrees of interrater agreement for the GCS and its components.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14747811     DOI: 10.1016/s0196-0644(03)00814-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Emerg Med        ISSN: 0196-0644            Impact factor:   5.721


  59 in total

1.  Effect of the modified Glasgow Coma Scale score criteria for mild traumatic brain injury on mortality prediction: comparing classic and modified Glasgow Coma Scale score model scores of 13.

Authors:  Jorge Humberto Mena; Alvaro Ignacio Sanchez; Andres M Rubiano; Andrew B Peitzman; Jason L Sperry; Maria Isabel Gutierrez; Juan Carlos Puyana
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2011-11

Review 2.  Evaluation of coma: a critical appraisal of popular scoring systems.

Authors:  Joshua Kornbluth; Anish Bhardwaj
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.210

Review 3.  The reliability of the Glasgow Coma Scale: a systematic review.

Authors:  Florence C M Reith; Ruben Van den Brande; Anneliese Synnot; Russell Gruen; Andrew I R Maas
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 4.  Controversies in the care of children with acute brain injury.

Authors:  Steven Weinstein
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 5.081

5.  Outcomes of a multicomponent intervention on occupational performance in persons with unilateral acquired brain injury.

Authors:  E Huertas Hoyas; E J Pedrero Pérez; A M Águila Maturana; G Rojo Mota; R Martínez Piédrola; M Pérez de Heredia Torres
Journal:  Funct Neurol       Date:  2016 Apr-Jun

6.  Validation of a new coma scale, the FOUR score, in the emergency department.

Authors:  Latha G Stead; Eelco F M Wijdicks; Anjali Bhagra; Rahul Kashyap; M Fernanda Bellolio; David L Nash; Sailaja Enduri; Raquel Schears; Bamlet William
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2008-09-20       Impact factor: 3.210

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

Authors:  Molly McNett; Shelly Amato; Anastasia Gianakis; Dawn Grimm; Sue Ann Philippbar; Josie Belle; Cristina Moran
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.210

Review 8.  Neurocritical care nursing research priorities.

Authors:  D M Olson; M M McNett; S Livesay; P D Le Roux; J I Suarez; C Bautista
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.210

9.  Comparison of sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scoring between nurses and residents.

Authors:  Nur Baykara; Kaan Gökduman; Tülay Hoşten; Mine Solak; Kamil Toker
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 2.078

10.  Copeptin is associated with mortality and outcome in patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage.

Authors:  Christian Zweifel; Mira Katan; Philipp Schuetz; Martin Siegemund; Nils G Morgenthaler; Adrian Merlo; Beat Mueller; Mirjam Christ-Crain
Journal:  BMC Neurol       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 2.474

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.