Comparison of the prognostic validity of three simplified consciousness assessment scales with the Glasgow Coma Scale.

Background: Various tools simpler than the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) have been proposed for the assessment of consciousness. In this study, the validity of three coma scales [Simplified Motor Scale, Modified GCS Motor Response, and AVPU (alert, verbal, painful, unresponsive)] is evaluated for the rec...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:European Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery Vol. 49; no. 5; pp. 2193 - 2203
Main Authors: Anestis, Dimitrios M., Marinos, Konstantinos, Tsitsopoulos, Parmenion P.
Format: research tables/charts Journal Article
Published: Springer Nature Oct2023
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=172329424&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 172329424
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        18639933
        3C05
      jtl: European Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery
      issn: 18639933
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2023
      vid: 49
      iid: 5
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
      place: New York, New York
    artinfo:
      ui:
        172329424
        164175228
        172329424
        172329424
        10.1007/s00068-023-02286-w
        172329424
      ppf: 2193
      ppct: 10
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
      tig:
        atl: Comparison of the prognostic validity of three simplified consciousness assessment scales with the Glasgow Coma Scale.
      aug:
        au:
          Anestis, Dimitrios M.
          Marinos, Konstantinos
          Tsitsopoulos, Parmenion P.
        affil: https://ror.org/05v5wwy67 Department of Neurosurgery, Hippokration General Hospital, Aristotle University School of Medicine, 49 Konstantinoupoleos str., 54642, Thessaloníki, Greece
      sug:
        subj:
          Instrument Validation
          Scales
          Coma Diagnosis
          Consciousness Evaluation
          Glasgow Coma Scale
          Predictive Validity
          Coma Prognosis
          Coma Mortality
          Hospital Mortality
          Outcome Assessment
          Human
          Validation Studies
          Prospective Studies
          Nonexperimental Studies
          ROC Curve
          Greece
          Hospitalization
          Comatose Patients
          Male
          Female
          Adolescence
          Adult
          Middle Age
          Aged
          Aged, 80 and Over
          Descriptive Statistics
          Post Hoc Analysis
          Intensive Care Units
          Length of Stay
          Data Analysis Software
          Confidence Intervals
          Sensitivity and Specificity
          Emergency Patients
          Adolescent: 13-18 years
          Adult: 19-44 years
          Middle Aged: 45-64 years
          Aged: 65+ years
          Aged, 80 & over
          Male
          Female
      ab: Background: Various tools simpler than the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) have been proposed for the assessment of consciousness. In this study, the validity of three coma scales [Simplified Motor Scale, Modified GCS Motor Response, and AVPU (alert, verbal, painful, unresponsive)] is evaluated for the recognition of coma and the prediction of short- and long-term mortality and poor outcome. The predictive validity of these scales is also compared to the GCS. Methods: Patients treated in the Department of Neurosurgery and the Intensive Care Unit in need of consciousness monitoring were assessed by four raters (two consultants, a resident and a nurse) using the GCS. The corresponding values of the simplified scales were estimated. Outcome was recorded at discharge and at 6 months. Areas Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUCs) were calculated for the prediction of mortality and poor outcome, and the identification of coma. Results: Eighty-six patients were included. The simplified scales showed good overall validity (AUCs > 0.720 for all outcomes of interest), but lower than the GCS. For the identification of coma and the prediction of long-term poor outcome, the difference was significant (p < 0.050) for all the ratings of the most experienced rater. The validity of these scales was comparable to the GCS only in predicting in-hospital mortality, but without this being consistent for all raters. Conclusion: The simplified scales showed inferior validity than the GCS. Their potential role in clinical practice needs further investigation. Thus, the replacement of the GCS as the main scale for consciousness assessment cannot be currently supported.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N