The Predictive Value of the Verbal Glasgow Coma Scale in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review.

Journal

The Journal of head trauma rehabilitation

ISSN: 1550-509X

Titre abrégé: J Head Trauma Rehabil

Pays: United States

ID NLM: 8702552

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
27 Feb 2024

Historique:

medline: 8 3 2024

pubmed: 8 3 2024

entrez: 7 3 2024

Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major global health concern, imposing significant burdens on individuals and healthcare systems. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), a widely utilized instrument for evaluating neurological status, includes 3 variables: motor, verbal, and eye opening. The GCS plays a crucial role in TBI severity stratification. While extensive research has explored the predictive capabilities of the overall GCS score and its motor component, the Verbal Glasgow Coma Scale (V-GCS) has garnered less attention. To examine the predictive accuracy of the V-GCS in assessing outcomes in patients with TBI, with a particular focus on functional outcome and mortality. In addition, we intend to compare its predictive performance with other components of the GCS. A systematic review, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, was conducted utilizing the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Inclusion criteria encompassed 10 clinical studies involving patients with TBI, wherein the level of consciousness was assessed using the verbal GCS score. Predominant statistical measures employed were odds ratios (ORs) and area under the curve (AUC). Recorded findings consistently underscore that lower V-GCS scores are associated with adverse functional outcomes and mortality in patients with TBI. Despite the predictive accuracy of the V-GCS, the Motor Glasgow Coma Scale (M-GCS) emerges as a superior predictor. In the context of TBI outcome prediction, the V-GCS demonstrates its efficacy as a prognostic tool. However, the M-GCS exhibits superior performance compared with the V-GCS. These insights underscore the multifaceted nature of TBI assessment and emphasize the necessity of considering distinct components of the Glasgow Coma Scale for comprehensive evaluation. Further research is warranted to refine and improve the application of these predictive measures in clinical practice.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND

OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE

To examine the predictive accuracy of the V-GCS in assessing outcomes in patients with TBI, with a particular focus on functional outcome and mortality. In addition, we intend to compare its predictive performance with other components of the GCS.

METHODS METHODS

A systematic review, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, was conducted utilizing the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Inclusion criteria encompassed 10 clinical studies involving patients with TBI, wherein the level of consciousness was assessed using the verbal GCS score. Predominant statistical measures employed were odds ratios (ORs) and area under the curve (AUC).

RESULTS RESULTS

Recorded findings consistently underscore that lower V-GCS scores are associated with adverse functional outcomes and mortality in patients with TBI. Despite the predictive accuracy of the V-GCS, the Motor Glasgow Coma Scale (M-GCS) emerges as a superior predictor.

CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS

In the context of TBI outcome prediction, the V-GCS demonstrates its efficacy as a prognostic tool. However, the M-GCS exhibits superior performance compared with the V-GCS. These insights underscore the multifaceted nature of TBI assessment and emphasize the necessity of considering distinct components of the Glasgow Coma Scale for comprehensive evaluation. Further research is warranted to refine and improve the application of these predictive measures in clinical practice.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000938 PMID: 38453630

pubmed: 38453630

doi: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000938

pii: 00001199-990000000-00135

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Informations de copyright

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Références

Blennow K, Brody DL, Kochanek PM, et al. Traumatic brain injuries. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:16084. doi:10.1038/nrdp.2016.84

doi: 10.1038/nrdp.2016.84

Mira RG, Lira M, Cerpa W. Traumatic brain injury: mechanisms of glial response. Front Physiol. 2021;12:740939. doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.740939

doi: 10.3389/fphys.2021.740939

Maas AIR, Stocchetti N, Bullock R. Moderate and severe traumatic brain injury in adults. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7(8):728–741. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70164-9

doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70164-9

Coronado VG, Haileyesus T, Cheng TA, et al. Trends in sports- and recreation-related traumatic brain injuries treated in US Emergency Departments: The National Electronic Injury Surveillance System–All Injury Program (NEISS-AIP) 2001-2012. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2015;30(3):185–197. doi:10.1097/HTR.0000000000000156

doi: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000156

Capizzi A, Woo J, Verduzco-Gutierrez M. Traumatic brain injury. Med Clin North Am. 2020;104(2):213–238. doi:10.1016/j.mcna.2019.11.001

doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2019.11.001

Law LM, Griffiths DR, Lifshitz J. Peg Forest Rehabilitation—a novel spatial navigation based cognitive rehabilitation paradigm for experimental neurotrauma. Behav Brain Res. 2023;443:114355. doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2023.114355

doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2023.114355

Hyder AA, Wunderlich CA, Puvanachandra P, Gururaj G, Kobusingye OC. The impact of traumatic brain injuries: a global perspective. NeuroRehabilitation. 2007;22(5):341–353.

Khalili H, Niakan A, Ghaffarpasand F. Effects of cerebrolysin on functional recovery in patients with severe disability after traumatic brain injury: a historical cohort study. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2017;152:34–38. doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.11.011

doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.11.011

Corrigan JD, Selassie AW, Orman JA. The epidemiology of traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2010;25(2):72–80. doi:10.1097/HTR.0b013e3181ccc8b4

doi: 10.1097/HTR.0b013e3181ccc8b4

Roozenbeek B, Maas AIR, Menon DK. Changing patterns in the epidemiology of traumatic brain injury. Nat Rev Neurol. 2013;9(4):231–236. doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2013.22

doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2013.22

von Steinbuechel N, Hahm S, Muehlan H, et al. Impact of sociodemographic, premorbid, and injury-related factors on patient-reported outcome trajectories after traumatic brain injury (TBI). J Clin Med. 2023;12(6):2246. doi:10.3390/jcm12062246

doi: 10.3390/jcm12062246

Dawson DR, Schwartz ML, Winocur G, Stuss DT. Return to productivity following traumatic brain injury: cognitive, psychological, physical, spiritual, and environmental correlates. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29(4):301–313. doi:10.1080/09638280600756687

doi: 10.1080/09638280600756687

Ponsford J, Schönberger M. Family functioning and emotional state two and five years after traumatic brain injury. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2010;16(2):306–317. doi:10.1017/S1355617709991342

doi: 10.1017/S1355617709991342

Ponsford JL, Downing MG, Olver J, et al. Longitudinal follow-up of patients with traumatic brain injury: outcome at two, five, and ten years post-injury. J Neurotrauma. 2014;31(1):64–77. doi:10.1089/neu.2013.2997

doi: 10.1089/neu.2013.2997

Haagsma JA, Graetz N, Bolliger I, et al. The global burden of injury: incidence, mortality, disability-adjusted life years and time trends from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Inj Prev. 2016;22(1):3–18. doi:10.1136/injuryprev-2015-041616

doi: 10.1136/injuryprev-2015-041616

Utomo WK, Gabbe BJ, Simpson PM, Cameron PA. Predictors of in-hospital mortality and 6-month functional outcomes in older adults after moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. Injury. 2009;40(9):973–977. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2009.05.034

doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2009.05.034

Salottolo K, Panchal R, Madayag RM, et al. Incorporating age improves the Glasgow Coma Scale score for predicting mortality from traumatic brain injury. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2021;6(1):e000641. doi:10.1136/tsaco-2020-000641

doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2020-000641

Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness. Lancet. 1974;2(7872):81–84. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(74)91639-0

doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(74)91639-0

Ting HW, Chen MS, Hsieh YC, Chan CL. Good mortality prediction by Glasgow Coma Scale for neurosurgical patients. J Chin Med Assoc. 2010;73(3):139–143. doi:10.1016/S1726-4901(10)70028-9

doi: 10.1016/S1726-4901(10)70028-9

Ariaka H, Kiryabwire J, Hussein S, Ogwal A, Nkonge E, Oyania F. A comparison of the predictive value of the Glasgow Coma Scale and the Kampala Trauma Score for mortality and length of hospital stay in head injury patients at a tertiary hospital in Uganda: a diagnostic prospective study. Surg Res Pract. 2020;2020:1362741. doi:10.1155/2020/1362741

doi: 10.1155/2020/1362741

Basak D, Chatterjee S, Attergrim J, et al. Glasgow Coma Scale compared to other trauma scores in discriminating in-hospital mortality of traumatic brain injury patients admitted to urban Indian hospitals: a multicentre prospective cohort study. Injury. 2023;54(1):93–99. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2022.09.035

doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2022.09.035

Jain S, Iverson LM. Glasgow Coma Scale. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2023. Accessed September 10, 2023. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513298/

Mehta R, Chinthapalli K. Glasgow Coma Scale explained. BMJ. 2019;365:l1296. doi:10.1136/bmj.l1296

doi: 10.1136/bmj.l1296

Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment and prognosis of coma after head injury. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1976;34(1-4):45–55. doi:10.1007/BF01405862

doi: 10.1007/BF01405862

Weir CJ. The prognostic value of the components of the Glasgow Coma Scale following acute stroke. QJM. 2003;96(1):67–74. doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcg008

doi: 10.1093/qjmed/hcg008

Starke RM, Komotar RJ, Otten ML, et al. Predicting long-term outcome in poor grade aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage patients utilising the Glasgow Coma Scale. J Clin Neurosci. 2009;16(1):26–31. doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2008.02.010

doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2008.02.010

Mood NE, Sabzghabaee AM, Yadegarfar Gh, Yaraghi A, Chaleshtori MR. Glasgow Coma Scale and its components on admission: are they valuable prognostic tools in acute mixed drug poisoning? Crit Care Res Pract. 2011;2011:952956. doi:10.1155/2011/952956

doi: 10.1155/2011/952956

Reith FCM, Lingsma HF, Gabbe BJ, Lecky FE, Roberts I, Maas AIR. Differential effects of the Glasgow Coma Scale score and its components: an analysis of 54,069 patients with traumatic brain injury. Injury. 2017;48(9):1932–1943. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2017.05.038

doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.05.038

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;134:103–112. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.003

doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.003

Marmarou A, Lu J, Butcher I, et al. Prognostic value of the Glasgow Coma Scale and pupil reactivity in traumatic brain injury assessed pre-hospital and on enrollment: an IMPACT analysis. J Neurotrauma. 2007;24(2):270–280. doi:10.1089/neu.2006.0029

doi: 10.1089/neu.2006.0029

Murray GD, Butcher I, McHugh GS, et al. Multivariable prognostic analysis in traumatic brain injury: results from the IMPACT Study. J Neurotrauma. 2007;24(2):329–337. doi:10.1089/neu.2006.0035

doi: 10.1089/neu.2006.0035

Kung WM, Tsai SH, Chiu WT, et al. Correlation between Glasgow coma score components and survival in patients with traumatic brain injury. Injury. 2011;42(9):940–944. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2010.09.019

doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.09.019

Hoffmann M, Lefering R, Rueger JM, et al. Pupil evaluation in addition to Glasgow Coma Scale components in prediction of traumatic brain injury and mortality. Br J Surg. 2012;99(suppl 1):122–130. doi:10.1002/bjs.7707

doi: 10.1002/bjs.7707

Kouloulas EJ, Papadeas AG, Michail X, Sakas DE, Boviatsis EJ. Prognostic value of time-related Glasgow Coma Scale components in severe traumatic brain injury: a prospective evaluation with respect to 1-year survival and functional outcome. Int J Rehabil Res. 2013;36(3):260–267. doi:10.1097/MRR.0b013e32835fd99a

doi: 10.1097/MRR.0b013e32835fd99a

Lesko MM, Jenks T, O'Brien SJ, et al. Comparing model performance for survival prediction using total Glasgow Coma Scale and its components in traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2013;30(1):17–22. doi:10.1089/neu.2012.2438

doi: 10.1089/neu.2012.2438

Corrigan JD, Kreider S, Cuthbert J, et al. Components of traumatic brain injury severity indices. J Neurotrauma. 2014;31(11):1000–1007. doi:10.1089/neu.2013.3145

doi: 10.1089/neu.2013.3145

Shibahashi K, Sugiyama K, Okura Y, Hoda H, Hamabe Y. Multicenter retrospective cohort study of “talk and die” after traumatic brain injury. World Neurosurg. 2017;107:82–86. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2017.07.117

doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.07.117

In-Suk Bae MD, Hyoung-Joon Chun MD, Hyeong-Joong Yi MD, Kyu-Sun Choi MD. Using components of the Glasgow Coma Scale and Rotterdam CT scores for mortality risk stratification in adult patients with traumatic brain injury: a preliminary study. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2020;188:105599. doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2019.105599

doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2019.105599

Delaplain PT, Albertson S, Grigorian A, et al. Early cognitive impairment is common after intracranial hemorrhage with mild traumatic brain injury. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020;89(1):215–221. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000002641

doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000002641

Teasdale G, Jennett B, Murray L, Murray G. Glasgow Coma Scale: to sum or not to sum. Lancet Lond Engl. 1983;2(8351):678. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(83)92550-3

doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(83)92550-3

Balestreri M, Czosnyka M, Chatfield DA, 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):161–162.

Gabbe BJ, Cameron PA, Finch CF. The status of the Glasgow Coma Scale. Emerg Med Australas. 2003;15(4):353–360. doi:10.1046/j.1442-2026.2003.00474.x

doi: 10.1046/j.1442-2026.2003.00474.x

Green SM. Cheerio, laddie! Bidding farewell to the Glasgow Coma Scale. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;58(5):427–430. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.06.009

doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.06.009

Cevik AA, Abu-Zidan FM. Searching for mortality predictors in trauma patients: a challenging task. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2018;44(4):561–565. doi:10.1007/s00068-017-0830-6

doi: 10.1007/s00068-017-0830-6

Matis G, Birbilis T. The Glasgow Coma Scale—a brief review. Past, present, future. Acta Neurol Belg. 2008;108(3):75–89.

Middleton PM. Practical use of the Glasgow Coma Scale: a comprehensive narrative review of GCS methodology. Australas Emerg Nurs J. 2012;15(3):170–183. doi:10.1016/j.aenj.2012.06.002

doi: 10.1016/j.aenj.2012.06.002

Whyte J, Cifu D, Dikmen S, Temkin N. Prediction of functional outcomes after traumatic brain injury: a comparison of 2 measures of duration of unconsciousness. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82(10):1355–1359. doi:10.1053/apmr.2001.26091

doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.26091

Gang MC, Hong KJ, Shin SD, et al. New prehospital scoring system for traumatic brain injury to predict mortality and severe disability using motor Glasgow Coma Scale, hypotension, and hypoxia: a nationwide observational study. Clin Exp Emerg Med. 2019;6(2):152–159. doi:10.15441/ceem.18.027

doi: 10.15441/ceem.18.027

Pencina MJ, D'Agostino RB Sr, D'Agostino RB Jr, Vasan RS. Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med. 2008;27(2):157–172; discussion 207-212. doi:10.1002/sim.2929

doi: 10.1002/sim.2929

Szumilas M. Explaining odds ratios. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2010;19(3):227–229.