Comparison of Glasgow Coma Scale and Full Outline of UnResponsiveness score for prediction of in-hospital mortality in traumatic brain injury patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:18
|
作者
Ahmadi, Sajjad [1 ]
Sarveazad, Arash [2 ,3 ]
Babahajian, Asrin [4 ]
Ahmadzadeh, Koohyar [5 ]
Yousefifard, Mahmoud [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Tabriz Univ Med Sci, Fac Med, Emergency Med Res Team, Tabriz, Iran
[2] Iran Univ Med Sci, Colorectal Res Ctr, Tehran, Iran
[3] Iran Univ Med Sci, Nursing Care Res Ctr, Tehran, Iran
[4] Kurdistan Univ Med Sci, Liver & Digest Res Ctr, Res Inst Hlth Dev, Sanandaj, Iran
[5] Iran Univ Med Sci, Physiol Res Ctr, Hemmat Highway, Tehran 14665354, Iran
[6] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Pediat Chron Kidney Dis Res Ctr, Tehran, Iran
关键词
Traumatic brain injury; Prognosis; Injury Severity; Decision Tools; HEAD-INJURY; CARE; GCS; RELIABILITY; VALIDITY;
D O I
10.1007/s00068-022-02111-w
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Background Currently, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is used to assess patients' level of consciousness. Although this tool is highly popular in clinical settings, it has various limitations that reduce its applicability in certain situations. This had led researchers to look for alternative scoring systems. This study aims to compare the value of GCS and Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) score for prediction of mortality in traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Method Online databases of Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched until the end of July 2022 for studies that had compared GCS and FOUR score in TBI patients. Interested outcomes were mortality and unfavorable outcome (mortality + disability). Findings are reported as area under the curve (AUC) sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio. Results 20 articles (comprised of 2083 patients) were included in this study. AUC of GCS and FOUR score for prediction of in-hospital mortality after TBI was 0.92 (95% CI 0.80-0.91) and 0.91 (95% CI 0.88-0.93) respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio of the two scores for prediction of in-hospital mortality after TBI was 44.51 (95% CI 23.58-84.03) for GCS and 45.16 (95% CI 24.25-84.09) for FOUR score. As for prediction of unfavorable outcome after TBI, AUC of GCS and FOUR score were 0.95 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.97) and 0.93 (95% CI 0.91-0.95), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratios for prediction of unfavorable outcome after TBI were 66.31 (95% CI 35.05-125.45) for GCS and 45.39 (95% CI 23.09-89.23) for FOUR score. Conclusion Moderate level of evidence showed that the value of GCS and FOUR score in the prediction of in-hospital mortality and unfavorable outcome is comparable. The similar performance of these scores in assessment of TBI patients gives the medical staff the option to use either one of them according to the situation at hand.
引用
收藏
页码:1693 / 1706
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Usefulness of the abbreviated injury score and the injury severity score in comparison to the Glasgow Coma Scale in predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury
    Foreman, Brandon P.
    Caesar, R. Ruth
    Parks, Jennifer
    Madden, Christopher
    Gentilello, Larry M.
    Shafi, Shahid
    Carlile, Mary C.
    Harper, Caryn R.
    Diaz-Arrastia, Ramon R.
    JOURNAL OF TRAUMA-INJURY INFECTION AND CRITICAL CARE, 2007, 62 (04): : 946 - 950
  • [32] β-Blockers for traumatic brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Ding, Huaqiang
    Liao, Luoxing
    Zheng, Xiaomei
    Wang, Qisheng
    Liu, Zhi
    Xu, Guanghui
    Li, Xing
    Liu, Liang
    JOURNAL OF TRAUMA AND ACUTE CARE SURGERY, 2021, 90 (06) : 1077 - 1085
  • [33] Efficacy and safety of erythropoietin in patients with traumatic brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Lee, Juncheol
    Cho, Youngsuk
    Choi, Kyu-Sun
    Kim, Wonhee
    Jang, Bo-Hyoung
    Shin, Hyungoo
    Ahn, Chiwon
    Lim, Tae Ho
    Yi, Hyeong-Joong
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2019, 37 (06) : 1101 - 1107
  • [34] Effect of Tranexamic Acid in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Weng, Shaotao
    Wang, Wanqi
    Wei, Quantang
    Lan, Huanzhen
    Su, Jing
    Xu, Yimin
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2019, 123 : 128 - 135
  • [35] A Child Presenting with a Glasgow Coma Scale Score of 13: Mild or Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury? A Narrative Review
    Hageman, Gerard
    Nihom, Jik
    NEUROPEDIATRICS, 2022, 53 (02) : 83 - 95
  • [36] Effectiveness of exercise in improving quality of life in patients with traumatic brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chang, Chia-Wen
    Tzeng, Hsin-Ya
    Ma, Ching-Yuan
    Li, Shih-Ting
    Chen, Kuan-Jung
    Chiang, Hui-Hsun
    BRAIN INJURY, 2023, : 140 - 146
  • [37] Glasgow Coma Scale Motor Score and Pupillary Reaction To Predict Six-Month Mortality in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury: Comparison of Field and Admission Assessment
    Majdan, Marek
    Steyerberg, Ewout W.
    Nieboer, Daan
    Mauritz, Walter
    Rusnak, Martin
    Lingsma, Hester F.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROTRAUMA, 2015, 32 (02) : 101 - 108
  • [38] The International Incidence of Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Nguyen, Rita
    Fiest, Kirsten M.
    McChesney, Jane
    Kwon, Churl-Su
    Jette, Nathalie
    Frolkis, Alexandra D.
    Atta, Callie
    Mah, Sarah
    Dhaliwal, Harinder
    Reid, Aylin
    Pringsheim, Tamara
    Dykeman, Jonathan
    Gallagher, Clare
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2016, 43 (06) : 774 - 785
  • [39] Prognostic Utility of Daily Changes in Glasgow Coma Scale and the Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Score Measurement in Patients with Metabolic Encephalopathy, Central Nervous System Infections and Stroke in Uganda
    Mbonde, Amir A.
    Demaerschalk, Bart M.
    Zhang, Nan
    Butterfield, Richard
    O'Carroll, Cumara B.
    NEUROCRITICAL CARE, 2021, 35 (03) : 835 - 844
  • [40] Emotion Recognition and Traumatic Brain Injury: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Jillian M. Murphy
    Joanne M. Bennett
    Xochitl de la Piedad Garcia
    Megan L. Willis
    Neuropsychology Review, 2022, 32 : 520 - 536