Kelly Catherine Anne, Upex Adrian, Bateman D Nicholas
Scottish Poisons Information Bureau, Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Ann Emerg Med. 2004 Aug;44(2):108-13. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.03.028.
We determine how the alert/verbal/painful/unresponsive (AVPU) responsiveness scale (alert, responsive to verbal stimulation, responsive to painful stimulation, and unresponsive) corresponds to the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) when assessing consciousness level in the poisoned patient.
Consciousness level was assessed using the AVPU responsiveness scale and the GCS in all patients admitted to the hospital during a 6-month period with deliberate or accidental poisoning. An AVPU responsiveness scale algorithm and details of the individual components of the GCS were provided. Data were recorded prospectively on admission to the toxicology ward by nursing staff in the majority of cases and from case records for the small number of patients admitted directly to the ICU. Nursing staff also recorded any difficulty assessing consciousness level using either scoring system.
Of the 1,384 patients studied, 1,138 patients were alert, 114 patients responded to a verbal stimulus, 87 patients responded to a painful stimulus, and 15 patients were unresponsive. The median GCS scores with interquartile ranges (IQR) for each AVPU responsiveness category were 15 (IQR 15), 13 (IQR 12 to 14), 8 (IQR 7 to 9), and 3 (IQR 3), respectively. There was a degree of overlap between the range of GCS scores for each category. Nursing staff recorded more difficulty using the GCS than the AVPU responsiveness scale. Alcohol-intoxicated patients proved to be the most difficult to assess. All patients who were unresponsive required intubation. No patient with a GCS score greater than 6 was intubated.
Each AVPU category can be shown to correspond to a range of GCS scores. The AVPU responsiveness scale appears to provide a rapid simple method of assessing consciousness level in most poisoned patients, but difficulty was still observed in assessing alcohol-intoxicated patients.
我们确定在评估中毒患者的意识水平时,清醒/对言语刺激有反应/对疼痛刺激有反应/无反应(AVPU)反应量表(清醒、对言语刺激有反应、对疼痛刺激有反应、无反应)与格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)之间的对应关系。
在6个月期间,对所有因故意或意外中毒而入院的患者,使用AVPU反应量表和GCS评估其意识水平。提供了AVPU反应量表算法和GCS各个组成部分的详细信息。大多数情况下,数据由护理人员在患者入院时前瞻性记录,少数直接入住重症监护病房的患者的数据则来自病例记录。护理人员还记录了使用任何一种评分系统评估意识水平时遇到的困难。
在研究的1384例患者中,1138例患者清醒,114例患者对言语刺激有反应,87例患者对疼痛刺激有反应,15例患者无反应。每个AVPU反应类别对应的GCS中位数得分及四分位间距(IQR)分别为15(IQR 15)、13(IQR 12至14)、8(IQR 7至9)和3(IQR 3)。每个类别GCS得分范围之间存在一定程度的重叠。护理人员记录使用GCS比使用AVPU反应量表更困难。事实证明,酒精中毒患者最难评估。所有无反应的患者均需要插管。没有GCS得分大于6的患者接受插管。
每个AVPU类别都可显示对应于一定范围的GCS得分。AVPU反应量表似乎为大多数中毒患者提供了一种快速简便的意识水平评估方法,但在评估酒精中毒患者时仍存在困难。