Outcome of Trauma Patients Admitted to Emergency Department Based on Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Score

  • Alireza Baratloo ORCID Department of Emergency Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Sahar Mirbaha ORCID Department of Emergency Medicine, Imam Hosein Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Maryam Bahreini ORCID Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Mohsen Banaie ORCID Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Arash Safaie ORCID Mail Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Keywords:
Consciousness, Craniocerebral trauma, Emergency service, hospital, Patient outcome assessment

Abstract

Introduction: Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) score is one of the existing scoring scales, which has been used for evaluating the level of consciousness in recent years. Objective: The present study has been done with the aim of evaluating the ability to predict the outcome of patients with head trauma based on FOUR score on admission to emergency department (ED). Methods: In the present prospective cross-sectional study, head trauma patients with any changes in alertness level presenting to ED were evaluated. FOUR score measurement was done on admission and 6 hours after that. The studied outcomes in the current study included discharge without sequel, discharge with neurologic sequel, brain death or death during 1 month after admission of the patients. To evaluate the correlation between FOUR score and the studied outcomes, area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used. Results: In the end, 52 patients with the mean age of 32.67 ± 15.20 years were evaluated (84.6% male). Traffic accident with the frequency of 39 (75.0%) patients was the most common mechanism of trauma among the studied patients and finally, after 1 month follow up it was determined that 13 (25%) patients were discharged without sequel and 31 (59.6%) died. Area under the ROC curve for prediction of the final outcome of death using FOUR score on admission and after 6 hours were 0.889 (95% confidence interval: 0.800 - 0.977) and 0.974 (95% confidence interval: 0.938 – 1.000), respectively. Best cutoff points for FOUR score were the scores 8 and 9 on admission of the patients, and the score 5, six hours after admission. Conclusion: Based on the findings of this study, it seems that FOUR score is applicable for prediction of probable death outcome in patients with head trauma presenting to ED.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Mommsen P, Zeckey C, Andruszkow H, Weidemann J, Frömke C, Puljic P, et al. Comparison of Different Thoracic Trauma Scoring Systems in Regards to Prediction of Post-Traumatic Complications and Outcome in Blunt Chest Trauma. J Surg Res. 2012;176(1):239-47.
2. Akavipat P, Sookplung P, Kaewsingha P, Maunsaiyat P. Prediction of discharge outcome with the full outline of unresponsiveness (FOUR) score in neurosurgical patients. Acta Med Okayama. 2011;65(3):205-10.
3. Gill M, Martens K, Lynch EL, Salih A, Green SM. Interrater reliability of 3 simplified neurologic scales applied to adults presenting to the emergency department with altered levels of consciousness. Ann Emerg Med. 2007;49(4):403-7. e1.
4. Balestreri M, Czosnyka M, Chatfield D, Steiner L, Schmidt E, Smielewski P, et al. Predictive value of Glasgow Coma Scale after brain trauma: change in trend over the past ten years. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004;75(1):161-2.
5. Chawda M, Hildebrand F, Pape HC, Giannoudis PV. Predicting outcome after multiple trauma: which scoring system? Injury. 2004;35(4):347-58.
6. Teasdale G, Murray G, Parker L, Jennett B. Adding up the Glasgow coma score. Acta Neurochir Suppl (Wien). 1979;28(1):13-6.
7. Benzer A, Mitterschiffthaler G, Pühkringer F, De La Renotiere K, Marosi M, Luef G, et al. Prediction of non-survival after trauma: Innsbruck Coma Scale. Lancet. 1991;338(8773):977-8.
8. Gill M, Windemuth R, Steele R, Green SM. A comparison of the Glasgow Coma Scale score to simplified alternative scores for the prediction of traumatic brain injury outcomes. Ann Emerg Med. 2005;45(1):37-42.
9. Stanczak DE, White III JG, Gouview WD, Moehle KA, Daniel M, Novack T, et al. Assessment of level of consciousness following severe neurological insult: a comparison of the psychometric qualities of the Glasgow Coma Scale and the Comprehensive Level of Consciousness Scale. J Neurosurg. 1984;60(5):955-60.
10. Starmark J-E, Stålhammar D, Holmgren E, Rosander B. A comparison of the Glasgow Coma Scale and the reaction level scale (RLS85). J Neurosurg. 1988;69(5):699-706.
11. Wijdicks EF, Bamlet WR, Maramattom BV, Manno EM, McClelland RL. Validation of a new coma scale: the FOUR score. Annals of neurology. 2005;58(4):585-93.
12. Bruno M-A, Ledoux D, Lambermont B, Damas F, Schnakers C, Vanhaudenhuyse A, et al. Comparison of the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness and Glasgow Liege Scale/Glasgow Coma Scale in an intensive care unit population. Neurocrit Care. 2011;15(3):447-53.
13. Iyer VN, Mandrekar JN, Danielson RD, Zubkov AY, Elmer JL, Wijdicks EF. Validity of the FOUR score coma scale in the medical intensive care unit. Mayo Clin Proc. 2009;84(8):694-701.
14. Wolf CA, Wijdicks EF, Bamlet WR, McClelland RL. Further validation of the FOUR score coma scale by intensive care nurses. Mayo Clin Proc. 2007;82(4):435-8.
15. Fischer M, Rüegg S, Czaplinski A, Strohmeier M, Lehmann A, Tschan F, et al. Inter-rater reliability of the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness score and the Glasgow Coma Scale in critically ill patients: a prospective observational study. Crit Care. 2010;14(2):R64.
16. Stead LG, Wijdicks EF, Bhagra A, Kashyap R, Bellolio MF, Nash DL, et al. Validation of a new coma scale, the FOUR score, in the emergency department. Neurocritical care. 2009;10(1):50-4.
17. Sadaka F, Patel D, Lakshmanan R. The FOUR score predicts outcome in patients after traumatic brain injury. Neurocrit Care. 2012;16(1):95-101.
18. Eken C, Kartal M, Bacanli A, Eray O. Comparison of the Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Score Coma Scale and the Glasgow Coma Scale in an emergency setting population. Eur J Emerg Med. 2009;16(1):29-36.
19. Baratloo A, Shokravi M, Safari S, Aziz A. Predictive Value of Glasgow Coma Score and Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Score on the Outcome of Multiple Trauma Patients. Arch Iran Med. 2016;19(3):215-20.
20. Jamal A, Sankhyan N, Jayashree M, Singhi S, Singhi P. Full Outline of Unresponsiveness score and the Glasgow Coma Scale in prediction of pediatric coma. World J Emerg Med. 2017;8(1):55-60.
21. Khanal K, Bhandari S, Shrestha N, Acharya S, Marhatta M. Comparison of outcome predictions by the Glasgow coma scale and the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness score in the neurological and neurosurgical patients in the Intensive Care Unit. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2016;20(8):473-6.
22. Nair SS, Surendran A, Prabhakar RB, Chisthi MM. Comparison between FOUR score and GCS in assessing patients with traumatic head injury: a tertiary centre study. Int Surg J. 2017;4(2):656-62.
23. Temiz N, Kose G, Tehli O, Acikel C, Hatipoglu S. A Comparison Between The Effectiveness of Full Outline of Unresponsiveness and Glasgow Coma Score at Neurosurgical Intensive Care Unit Patients. Turk Neurosurg. 2016 (in press).
24. Sepahvand E, Jalali R, Mirzaei M, Ebrahimzadeh F, Ahmadi M, Amraii E. Glasgow Coma Scale versus full outline of UnResponsiveness Scale for prediction of outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury in the intensive care unit. Turk Neurosurg. 2016;26(5):720-4.
25. McNett MM, Amato S, Philippbar SA. A comparative study of Glasgow Coma Scale and full outline of unresponsiveness scores for predicting long-term outcome after brain injury. J Neurosci Nurs. 2016;48(4):207-14.
Published
2017-10-09
How to Cite
1.
Baratloo A, Mirbaha S, Bahreini M, Banaie M, Safaie A. Outcome of Trauma Patients Admitted to Emergency Department Based on Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Score. Adv J Emerg Med. 1(1):e2.
Section
Original article