Literature DB >> 27197686

Performance of the Pediatric Glasgow Coma Scale Score in the Evaluation of Children With Blunt Head Trauma.

Dominic A Borgialli1,2, Prashant Mahajan3, John D Hoyle4,5, Elizabeth C Powell6, Frances M Nadel7, Michael G Tunik8, Adele Foerster9, Lydia Dong10, Michelle Miskin10, Peter S Dayan11, James F Holmes12, Nathan Kuppermann12,13.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare the accuracy of the pediatric Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score in preverbal children to the standard GCS score in older children for identifying those with traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) after blunt head trauma.
METHODS: This was a planned secondary analysis of a large prospective observational multicenter cohort study of children with blunt head trauma. Clinical data were recorded onto case report forms before computed tomography (CT) results or clinical outcomes were known. The total and component GCS scores were assigned by the physician at initial emergency department evaluation. The pediatric GCS was used for children <2 years old and the standard GCS for those ≥2 years old. Outcomes were TBI visible on CT and clinically important TBI (ciTBI), defined as death from TBI, neurosurgery, intubation for more than 24 hours for the head injury, or hospitalization for 2 or more nights for the head injury in association with TBI on CT. We compared the areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves between age cohorts for the association of GCS and the TBI outcomes.
RESULTS: We enrolled 42,041 patients, of whom 10,499 (25.0%) were <2 years old. Among patients <2 years, 313/3,329 (9.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.4% to 10.4%) of those imaged had TBIs on CT and 146/10,499 (1.4%, 95% CI = 1.2% to 1.6%) had ciTBIs. In patients ≥2 years, 773/11,977 (6.5%, 95% CI = 6.0% to 6.9%) of those imaged had TBIs on CT and 572/31,542 (1.8%, 95% CI = 1.7% to 2.0%) had ciTBIs. For the pediatric GCS in children <2 years old, the area under the ROC curve was 0.61 (95% CI = 0.59 to 0.64) for TBI on CT and 0.77 (95% CI = 0.73 to 0.81) for ciTBI. For the standard GCS in older children, the area under the ROC curve was 0.71 (95% CI = 0.70 to 0.73) for TBI on CT scan and 0.81 (95% CI = 0.79 to 0.83) for ciTBI.
CONCLUSIONS: The pediatric GCS for preverbal children was somewhat less accurate than the standard GCS for older children in identifying those with TBI on CT. However, the pediatric GCS for preverbal children and the standard GCS for older children were equally accurate for identifying ciTBI.
© 2016 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27197686     DOI: 10.1111/acem.13014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  10 in total

1.  Survey of Bedside Clinical Neurologic Assessments in U.S. PICUs.

Authors:  Matthew P Kirschen; Megan Snyder; Madeline Winters; Rebecca Ichord; Robert A Berg; Vinay Nadkarni; Alexis Topjian
Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 3.624

Review 2.  Consensus statement on abusive head trauma in infants and young children.

Authors:  Arabinda Kumar Choudhary; Sabah Servaes; Thomas L Slovis; Vincent J Palusci; Gary L Hedlund; Sandeep K Narang; Joëlle Anne Moreno; Mark S Dias; Cindy W Christian; Marvin D Nelson; V Michelle Silvera; Susan Palasis; Maria Raissaki; Andrea Rossi; Amaka C Offiah
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2018-05-23

3.  Indications for prehospital intubation among severely injured children and the prevalence of significant traumatic brain injury among those intubated due to impaired level of consciousness.

Authors:  Nir Samuel; Yoav Hoffmann; Stav Rakedzon; Ari M Lipsky; Aeyal Raz; Hen Ben Lulu; Hany Bahouth; Danny Epstein
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2022-05-07       Impact factor: 3.693

4.  Using an artificial neural network to predict traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Andrew T Hale; David P Stonko; Jaims Lim; Oscar D Guillamondegui; Chevis N Shannon; Mayur B Patel
Journal:  J Neurosurg Pediatr       Date:  2018-11-02       Impact factor: 2.713

5.  Assessment of the advantage of the serum S100B protein biomonitoring in the management of paediatric mild traumatic brain injury-PROS100B: protocol of a multicentre unblinded stepped wedge cluster randomised trial.

Authors:  Damien Bouvier; David Balayssac; Julie Durif; Charline Mourgues; Catherine Sarret; Bruno Pereira; Vincent Sapin
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-05-24       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Correlations Between the Glasgow Score and the Survival Period in Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

Authors:  RĂzvan Ştefan Ţolescu; Marian Valentin ZorilĂ; Roxana Eugenia ZĂvoi; Cristina Popescu; Ilie Dumitru; Alexandru Constantin Oprica; LaurenŢiu MogoantĂ
Journal:  Curr Health Sci J       Date:  2020-12-31

7.  Conservative treatment and outcome of upper cervical spine fractures in young children: A STROBE-compliant case series.

Authors:  Ryszard Tomaszewski; Sergio B Sesia; Daniel Studer; Erich Rutz; Johannes M Mayr
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-04-02       Impact factor: 1.889

8.  Paediatric Trauma Score as a non-imaging tool for predicting intracranial haemorrhage in patients with traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Heoung Jin Kim; Sohyun Eun; Seo Hee Yoon; Moon Kyu Kim; Hyun Soo Chung; Chungmo Koo
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-10-22       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Role of Routine Repeat Head CT for Pediatric Patients under 2 Years Old with Mild-to-moderate Traumatic Brain Injury.

Authors:  Shu Utsumi; Shima Ohnishi; Shunsuke Amagasa; Ryuji Sasaki; Satoko Uematsu; Mitsuru Kubota
Journal:  Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo)       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 1.742

10.  Protocol for the multicentre prospective paediatric craniectomy and cranioplasty registry (pedCCR) under the auspices of the European Society for Paediatric Neurosurgery (ESPN).

Authors:  Thomas Beez; Martin U Schuhmann; Paolo Frassanito; Federico Di Rocco; Ulrich W Thomale; Hans Christoph Bock
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2022-05-09       Impact factor: 1.532

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.