无反应性量表(FOUR)和格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)在确定重症监护病房患者预后中的比较——一项前瞻性研究

Anandhi Deva Amirtharaj, Shreedevi Balachandran, Arunodaya Ramarao Gujjar, Judie Arulappan, Sathish Kumar Jaypal
{"title":"无反应性量表(FOUR)和格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)在确定重症监护病房患者预后中的比较——一项前瞻性研究","authors":"Anandhi Deva Amirtharaj, Shreedevi Balachandran, Arunodaya Ramarao Gujjar, Judie Arulappan, Sathish Kumar Jaypal","doi":"10.4103/ijnpnd.ijnpnd_6_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Accurate assessment and monitoring of level of consciousness is fundamental for prompt management and recognising warning signs of deterioration in the patient. The Glasgow coma scale (GCS), a widely used tool was compared with full outline of unresponsiveness (FOUR) score as an alternate tool for assessment and prognostication of the outcome. The purpose of this study aimed to compare and evaluate the accuracy between GCS and FOUR score (FS) tool in the neurological assessment and predicting the functional outcome. Materials and Methods: For this observational study, 131 patients were recruited from two major teaching hospitals in Middle Eastern countries. Data was collected on admission from emergency department and reassessed on day two & four. Patient was followed on discharge and outcome evaluated using the Glasgow outcome scale (GOS). Results: The mean age was 56.39±17.29 (18- 87years) with 83(63.4%) male patients. 93 (71%) patients admitted with neurological problems. In terms of predicting the outcome using the GOS, the area under the ROC curve was 92% (CI- 95%, 0.870-0.975) for FS and 74.73 % (CI-95%, 0.825-0.951) for GCS. The sensitivity and specificity for FS on admission (0.976 & 0.543), day two (0.971 & 0.495) & day four (0.971 & 0.340) and for GCS is (0.918 & 0.370) (0.941 & 0.433) (0.971 & 0.330). Conclusions: The FS tool is precise in predicting power of mortality and is an ideal complementary or substitute tool for GCS.","PeriodicalId":14233,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Nutrition, Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) in Determining Outcome among Patients in Critical Care Units – A Prospective Study\",\"authors\":\"Anandhi Deva Amirtharaj, Shreedevi Balachandran, Arunodaya Ramarao Gujjar, Judie Arulappan, Sathish Kumar Jaypal\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/ijnpnd.ijnpnd_6_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Accurate assessment and monitoring of level of consciousness is fundamental for prompt management and recognising warning signs of deterioration in the patient. The Glasgow coma scale (GCS), a widely used tool was compared with full outline of unresponsiveness (FOUR) score as an alternate tool for assessment and prognostication of the outcome. The purpose of this study aimed to compare and evaluate the accuracy between GCS and FOUR score (FS) tool in the neurological assessment and predicting the functional outcome. Materials and Methods: For this observational study, 131 patients were recruited from two major teaching hospitals in Middle Eastern countries. Data was collected on admission from emergency department and reassessed on day two & four. Patient was followed on discharge and outcome evaluated using the Glasgow outcome scale (GOS). Results: The mean age was 56.39±17.29 (18- 87years) with 83(63.4%) male patients. 93 (71%) patients admitted with neurological problems. In terms of predicting the outcome using the GOS, the area under the ROC curve was 92% (CI- 95%, 0.870-0.975) for FS and 74.73 % (CI-95%, 0.825-0.951) for GCS. The sensitivity and specificity for FS on admission (0.976 & 0.543), day two (0.971 & 0.495) & day four (0.971 & 0.340) and for GCS is (0.918 & 0.370) (0.941 & 0.433) (0.971 & 0.330). Conclusions: The FS tool is precise in predicting power of mortality and is an ideal complementary or substitute tool for GCS.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14233,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Nutrition, Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Nutrition, Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijnpnd.ijnpnd_6_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Nutrition, Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijnpnd.ijnpnd_6_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

准确评估和监测意识水平是及时管理和识别患者恶化的警告信号的基础。格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)是一种广泛使用的工具,作为评估和预测结果的替代工具,与无反应性全大纲评分(FOUR)进行比较。本研究的目的是比较和评价GCS和FOUR评分(FS)工具在神经学评估和预测功能预后方面的准确性。材料和方法:在这项观察性研究中,从中东国家的两家主要教学医院招募了131名患者。从急诊科入院时收集数据,并在第二天重新评估;四。患者出院后随访,使用格拉斯哥预后量表(GOS)评估预后。结果:平均年龄56.39±17.29岁(18 ~ 87岁),男性83例(63.4%)。93例(71%)患者因神经系统问题入院。在GOS预测预后方面,FS和GCS的ROC曲线下面积分别为92% (CI-95%, 0.870-0.975)和74.73% (CI-95%, 0.825-0.951)。入院时FS的敏感性和特异性(0.976 &0.543),第二天(0.971 &0.495),第四天(0.971 &0.340), GCS为(0.918 &0.370) (0.941 &(0.971 &0.330)。结论:FS工具对死亡率的预测能力准确,是GCS的理想补充或替代工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) in Determining Outcome among Patients in Critical Care Units – A Prospective Study
Accurate assessment and monitoring of level of consciousness is fundamental for prompt management and recognising warning signs of deterioration in the patient. The Glasgow coma scale (GCS), a widely used tool was compared with full outline of unresponsiveness (FOUR) score as an alternate tool for assessment and prognostication of the outcome. The purpose of this study aimed to compare and evaluate the accuracy between GCS and FOUR score (FS) tool in the neurological assessment and predicting the functional outcome. Materials and Methods: For this observational study, 131 patients were recruited from two major teaching hospitals in Middle Eastern countries. Data was collected on admission from emergency department and reassessed on day two & four. Patient was followed on discharge and outcome evaluated using the Glasgow outcome scale (GOS). Results: The mean age was 56.39±17.29 (18- 87years) with 83(63.4%) male patients. 93 (71%) patients admitted with neurological problems. In terms of predicting the outcome using the GOS, the area under the ROC curve was 92% (CI- 95%, 0.870-0.975) for FS and 74.73 % (CI-95%, 0.825-0.951) for GCS. The sensitivity and specificity for FS on admission (0.976 & 0.543), day two (0.971 & 0.495) & day four (0.971 & 0.340) and for GCS is (0.918 & 0.370) (0.941 & 0.433) (0.971 & 0.330). Conclusions: The FS tool is precise in predicting power of mortality and is an ideal complementary or substitute tool for GCS.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Nutrition, Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases (IJNPND) is an international, open access, peer reviewed journal which covers all fields related to nutrition, pharmacology, neurological diseases. IJNPND was started by Dr. Mohamed Essa based on his personal interest in Science in 2009. This journal doesn’t link with any society or any association. The co-editor-in chiefs of IJNPND (Prof. Gilles J. Guillemin, Dr. Abdur Rahman and Prof. Ross grant) and editorial board members are well known figures in the fields of Nutrition, pharmacology, and neuroscience. First, the journal was started as two issues per year, then it was changed into 3 issues per year and since 2013, it publishes 4 issues per year till now. This shows the slow and steady growth of this journal. To support the reviewers and editorial board members, IJNPND offers awards to the people who does more reviews within one year. The International Journal of Nutrition, Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases (IJNPND) is published Quarterly. IJNPND has three main sections, such as nutrition, pharmacology, and neurological diseases. IJNPND publishes Research Papers, Review Articles, Commentaries, case reports, brief communications and Correspondence in all three sections. Reviews and Commentaries are normally commissioned by the journal, but consideration will be given to unsolicited contributions. International Journal of Nutrition, Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases is included in the UGC-India Approved list of journals.
期刊最新文献
A Cross-Sectional Study to Determine the Prevalence and Predictors of Depression and Anxiety in Type 2 Diabetes Patients in South India Quality parameters determining the buyer behavior toward purchase of bakery product (cake) Analysis of Sodium Levels in Different Brands of Edible Salts by Flame Photometer Risk of COVID-19 among patients with respiratory illnesses and comorbidities at Eastern Province of Sri Lanka: A retrospective study Association of body mass index with dietary intake and self-care health activities of mothers after postpartum: A mixed-method research in Chennai City, India
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1