Cohen Jennifer
Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, CHOC Children's Hospital, Orange, CA, USA.
J Neurosci Nurs. 2009 Oct;41(5):261-7; quiz 268-9. doi: 10.1097/jnn.0b013e3181b2c766.
The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was developed in 1974 to objectively describe neurological status and predict outcome in neuroscience patients. Through the years, the GCS has become the gold standard for coma assessment. Despite its widespread use, the GCS has many limitations that are well documented in the literature. The Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) score is a new coma scale that was recently developed and validated in adults as a proposed replacement for the GCS. The purpose of this study was to compare the interrater reliability and predictive validity of the FOUR score and the GCS in pediatric patients. The interrater reliability for the GCS was good (k(w) = .738), and that for the FOUR score was excellent (k(w) = .951). Outcome prediction analysis showed that the FOUR score and the GCS are both able to predict in-hospital morbidity and poor outcome at the end of hospitalization. The results from this pediatric study were consistent with the adult studies which suggest that the FOUR score is a reliable and valid tool for use in a wide variety of neuroscience patients.
格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)于1974年制定,用于客观描述神经科学患者的神经状态并预测其预后。多年来,GCS已成为昏迷评估的金标准。尽管其应用广泛,但GCS存在许多局限性,文献中对此有充分记载。全面无反应性大纲(FOUR)评分是一种新的昏迷量表,最近在成人中开发并经验证,提议作为GCS的替代方案。本研究的目的是比较FOUR评分和GCS在儿科患者中的评分者间信度和预测效度。GCS的评分者间信度良好(k(w)=0.738),FOUR评分的评分者间信度极佳(k(w)=0.951)。预后预测分析表明,FOUR评分和GCS都能够预测住院期间的发病率以及住院结束时的不良预后。这项儿科研究的结果与成人研究一致,表明FOUR评分是一种可靠且有效的工具,可用于各类神经科学患者。