| Sumario: | Neurological assessment is key in the prognosis and management of critically ill patients. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and Full Outline of Unresponsiveness scale (FOUR) aid in assessments, decisions, and outcome prediction. The goal was to compare the performance of the GCS with FOUR scales in the outcome prediction in ICU. This was an analytical prospective study. The Census method was used to select 55 Kenyatta National Hospital ICU clients. The performance of the GCS and FOUR scores in predicting survival was analyzed using binary logistic regression. ROC curves were computed to assess the accuracy of the GCS and FOUR scales. Calculation of cut-off points was calculated and determination of overall accuracy of prediction of results, sensitivity, and specificity was identified. 67% of the patients were male; the mean age was 41 years; the average length of stay was ten days. Most patients were referrals from other facilities. Patients with a low level of GCS below 6, at admission, were 40%, at 48 hours they were 39% and for low scores of FOUR at admission were 47%, at 48 hours were 39% while those with high scores (above 14) were 40%. The survival rate for both scales at 48 hours was 100%, which continued to decrease over the days. On day 14, the predicted survival was 50% while the actual survival was 65%. The sensitivity of GCS at admission was 47.4% and 98% during evaluation while FOUR scores were 68.4% at admission and were 100% on day 14. At 48 hours and 14 days of admission to the ICU, FOUR score was able to accurately predict the survival rate of patient outcomes. Findings will be presented at scientific conferences. The researcher recommends a larger study to be done to confirm that the FOUR score is a more reliable tool for the assessment of ICU patients.
|
|---|