Literature DB >> 30973053

Glasgow Outcome Scale Measures and Impact on Analysis and Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

Jose-Miguel Yamal1, H Julia Hannay2,3, Shankar Gopinath4, Imoigele P Aisiku5, Julia S Benoit3,6, Claudia S Robertson4.   

Abstract

The original unstructured Glasgow Outcome Scale (uGOS) and the newer structured interviews GOS and the Extended GOS (GOS-E) have been used widely as outcomes in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) trials. We compared outcome categories (ranging from dead [D] to good recovery [GR]) for each measure in a randomized trial of transfusion threshold and the implications of measure choice and analysis methods for the results of the trial. We planned to explore patient symptomology possibly driving any discrepancies between the patient's uGOS and GOS scores. Category correspondence between uGOS and GOS scores occurred in 160 (88.4%) of the 181 analyzed cases. The GOS-E and GOS instruments incorporated more behavioral/cognitive/social and other components, leading to a worse outcome in some cases than for the uGOS. Choice of outcome measure and analysis led to incongruous conclusions. Dichotomizing uGOS into favorable outcome (GR and moderate disability [MD] categories) versus unfavorable (severe disability [SD], vegetative state [VS], and D categories), we observed a significant effect of transfusion threshold (odds ratio [OR] = 0.51, p = 0.03; adjusted OR = 0.40, p = 0.02). For the same dichotomization of GOS and GOS-E, the effect was not statistically significant but the ORs were similar (ORs between 0.57 and 0.68, p > 0.15 for all). An effect was not detected using ordinal logistic regression or sliding dichotomy method for all three measures. Differences in categorizations of subjects between moderate and severe disability among the scales impacted conclusions of the trial. In future studies, particular attention should be given to implementing GOS measures and describing the methodology for how outcomes were ascertained.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EPO; GOS; closed head injury; hemoglobin transfusion trigger; sliding dichotomy; traumatic brain injury

Year:  2019        PMID: 30973053      PMCID: PMC6709721          DOI: 10.1089/neu.2018.5939

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurotrauma        ISSN: 0897-7151            Impact factor:   5.269


  49 in total

1.  Out-of-hospital hypertonic resuscitation following severe traumatic brain injury: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Eileen M Bulger; Susanne May; Karen J Brasel; Martin Schreiber; Jeffrey D Kerby; Samuel A Tisherman; Craig Newgard; Arthur Slutsky; Raul Coimbra; Scott Emerson; Joseph P Minei; Berit Bardarson; Peter Kudenchuk; Andrew Baker; Jim Christenson; Ahamed Idris; Daniel Davis; Timothy C Fabian; Tom P Aufderheide; Clifton Callaway; Carolyn Williams; Jane Banek; Christian Vaillancourt; Rardi van Heest; George Sopko; J Steven Hata; David B Hoyt
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Assessing disability after head injury: improved use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale.

Authors:  L E Pettigrew; J T Wilson; G M Teasdale
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 5.115

3.  Cognitive sequelae of severe head injury in relation to the Glasgow Outcome Scale.

Authors:  D N Brooks; J Hosie; M R Bond; B Jennett; M Aughton
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1986-05       Impact factor: 10.154

4.  Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage.

Authors:  B Jennett; M Bond
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1975-03-01       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  A longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging study of the apparent diffusion coefficient values in corpus callosum during the first year after traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Kent Gøran Moen; Asta Kristine Håberg; Toril Skandsen; Torun Gangaune Finnanger; Anne Vik
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2014-01-01       Impact factor: 5.269

6.  Cognitive impairment 3 months after moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: a prospective follow-up study.

Authors:  Toril Skandsen; Torun G Finnanger; Stein Andersson; Stian Lydersen; Jan F Brunner; Anne Vik
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.966

7.  Functional outcome 10 years after traumatic brain injury: its relationship with demographic, injury severity, and cognitive and emotional status.

Authors:  Jennie Ponsford; Kristy Draper; Michael Schönberger
Journal:  J Int Neuropsychol Soc       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 2.892

8.  Effects of Glasgow Outcome Scale misclassification on traumatic brain injury clinical trials.

Authors:  Juan Lu; Gordon D Murray; Ewout W Steyerberg; Isabella Butcher; Gillian S McHugh; Hester Lingsma; Nino Mushkudiani; Sung Choi; Andrew I R Maas; Anthony Marmarou
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 5.269

9.  Agitation after traumatic brain injury and predictors of outcome.

Authors:  Rajiv Singh; Guru Venkateshwara; Krishnan P S Nair; Muhammed Khan; Rafat Saad
Journal:  Brain Inj       Date:  2013-12-30       Impact factor: 2.311

10.  Disability after severe head injury: observations on the use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale.

Authors:  B Jennett; J Snoek; M R Bond; N Brooks
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1981-04       Impact factor: 10.154

View more
  3 in total

1.  Clinical efficacy and prognosis of standard large trauma craniotomy for patients with severe frontotemporal craniocerebral injury.

Authors:  Zhiqi Huang; Lijin Yan
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 4.060

2.  Observation on the clinical efficacy of external ventricular drain combined with intraventricular urokinase injection and intravenous piracetam in the treatment of intraventricular hemorrhage.

Authors:  Jing Cui; Xin-Lei Ma; Jian-Zhou Tong; Min Shu
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2022 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.340

3.  Development and validation of a prediction nomogram for a 6-month unfavorable prognosis in traumatic brain-injured patients undergoing primary decompressive craniectomy: An observational study.

Authors:  Zhiji Tang; Kun Hu; Ruijin Yang; Mingang Zou; Ming Zhong; Qiangliang Huang; Wenjin Wei; Qiuhua Jiang
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-08-03       Impact factor: 4.086

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.