BACKGROUND: Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scoring is enigmatic in intubated patients. To determine if there is consensus among Level I trauma centers, a national telephone survey was conducted. METHODS: Trauma registrars at state-verified or American College of Surgeons-verified Level I trauma centers were questioned about GCS scoring, recording, and reporting in patients who are intubated or intubated and pharmacologically paralyzed. RESULTS: Seventy-three centers were contacted. Seventy-one use initial GCS scores for registry recording. Intubated patients are given 1 point for verbal component plus eye and motor scores at 26% of centers and a total GCS score of 3 at 23%; GCS score is estimated with "T" given for verbal component at 16%, scored as unknown at 10%, always scored as 15 at 10%, and the method of scoring is unknown at 15%. Pharmacologically paralyzed intubated patients are given a total GCS score of 3 at 34%, GCS score is estimated with "T" given for verbal component at 18%, patients are given 1 point for verbal component plus eye and motor scores at 12%, scored as unknown at 11%, always scored as 15 at 8%, and the method of scoring is unknown at 16%. CONCLUSION: Wide variation in GCS scoring among Level I trauma centers was identified. Because GCS scores are used in treatment algorithms, trauma scoring, and outcome prediction (Trauma and Injury Severity Score), uniform scoring is essential and should be pursued. Use of state and national databases and outcome research may be adversely affected by the lack of consistent GCS scoring.
BACKGROUND: Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scoring is enigmatic in intubated patients. To determine if there is consensus among Level I trauma centers, a national telephone survey was conducted. METHODS:Trauma registrars at state-verified or American College of Surgeons-verified Level I trauma centers were questioned about GCS scoring, recording, and reporting in patients who are intubated or intubated and pharmacologically paralyzed. RESULTS: Seventy-three centers were contacted. Seventy-one use initial GCS scores for registry recording. Intubated patients are given 1 point for verbal component plus eye and motor scores at 26% of centers and a total GCS score of 3 at 23%; GCS score is estimated with "T" given for verbal component at 16%, scored as unknown at 10%, always scored as 15 at 10%, and the method of scoring is unknown at 15%. Pharmacologically paralyzed intubated patients are given a total GCS score of 3 at 34%, GCS score is estimated with "T" given for verbal component at 18%, patients are given 1 point for verbal component plus eye and motor scores at 12%, scored as unknown at 11%, always scored as 15 at 8%, and the method of scoring is unknown at 16%. CONCLUSION: Wide variation in GCS scoring among Level I trauma centers was identified. Because GCS scores are used in treatment algorithms, trauma scoring, and outcome prediction (Trauma and Injury Severity Score), uniform scoring is essential and should be pursued. Use of state and national databases and outcome research may be adversely affected by the lack of consistent GCS scoring.
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
Authors: Joshua B Brown; Raquel M Forsythe; Nicole A Stassen; Andrew B Peitzman; Timothy R Billiar; Jason L Sperry; Mark L Gestring Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 3.313