Taylor E Messick-Ngo, Bhani K Chawla-Kondal, Gabriel L Scally, Brittany R Sadoma, Nicholas W Sheets, David S Plurad, Emily D Dubina
{"title":"Prehospital versus Emergency Department Glasgow Coma Scale in Blunt Traumatic Brain Injury: A Retrospective Review of the National Trauma Data Bank.","authors":"Taylor E Messick-Ngo, Bhani K Chawla-Kondal, Gabriel L Scally, Brittany R Sadoma, Nicholas W Sheets, David S Plurad, Emily D Dubina","doi":"10.1177/00031348251359122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>IntroductionPrevious studies have demonstrated variability between prehospital (PH) and Emergency Department (ED) Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) for patients suffering traumatic brain injuries (TBIs). Understanding the relationship between PH and ED GCS, as well as the factors that may contribute to any observed differences, is crucial for optimizing trauma triage protocols and resource allocation.MethodsThe National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) was surveyed for adults aged ≥18 years following blunt TBI. PH and ED GCS scores were compared, including subgroup analysis of different TBI severities, Injury Severity Score (ISS), transport time, trauma verification level, intoxication, ICP monitor use, and mortality.Results419 145 patients were included. Overall, there was no difference in median PH and ED GCS (15 vs 15, z = 0.00, <i>P =</i> 1.00), with substantial agreement (κ<sub>w</sub> = 0.759, <i>P</i> < .001). For mild TBI, there was fair agreement between PH and ED GCS (κ<sub>w</sub> = 0.409, <i>P</i> < .001); for moderate TBI, there was moderate agreement (κ<sub>w</sub> = 0.569, <i>P</i> < .001); and for severe TBI, there was substantial agreement (κ<sub>w</sub> = 0.665, <i>P</i> < .001). Alcohol and drug intoxication, mortality, need for ICP monitor, and transport times were associated with differences in PH vs ED GCS, while ISS was not.DiscussionPH and ED providers overall score patients similarly for GCS. While some minor differences were seen for certain subgroups (mild and severe TBI, mortality, alcohol or drug intoxication, transport times), these differences are likely not clinically significant.</p>","PeriodicalId":7782,"journal":{"name":"American Surgeon","volume":" ","pages":"31348251359122"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348251359122","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
IntroductionPrevious studies have demonstrated variability between prehospital (PH) and Emergency Department (ED) Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) for patients suffering traumatic brain injuries (TBIs). Understanding the relationship between PH and ED GCS, as well as the factors that may contribute to any observed differences, is crucial for optimizing trauma triage protocols and resource allocation.MethodsThe National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) was surveyed for adults aged ≥18 years following blunt TBI. PH and ED GCS scores were compared, including subgroup analysis of different TBI severities, Injury Severity Score (ISS), transport time, trauma verification level, intoxication, ICP monitor use, and mortality.Results419 145 patients were included. Overall, there was no difference in median PH and ED GCS (15 vs 15, z = 0.00, P = 1.00), with substantial agreement (κw = 0.759, P < .001). For mild TBI, there was fair agreement between PH and ED GCS (κw = 0.409, P < .001); for moderate TBI, there was moderate agreement (κw = 0.569, P < .001); and for severe TBI, there was substantial agreement (κw = 0.665, P < .001). Alcohol and drug intoxication, mortality, need for ICP monitor, and transport times were associated with differences in PH vs ED GCS, while ISS was not.DiscussionPH and ED providers overall score patients similarly for GCS. While some minor differences were seen for certain subgroups (mild and severe TBI, mortality, alcohol or drug intoxication, transport times), these differences are likely not clinically significant.
先前的研究已经证明院前(PH)和急诊科(ED)格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)对创伤性脑损伤(tbi)患者的差异。了解PH和ED GCS之间的关系,以及可能导致任何观察到的差异的因素,对于优化创伤分诊方案和资源分配至关重要。方法对国家创伤数据库(NTDB)中年龄≥18岁的成人钝性脑损伤患者进行调查。比较PH和ED GCS评分,包括不同TBI严重程度、损伤严重程度评分(ISS)、运输时间、创伤验证水平、中毒、ICP监护仪使用和死亡率的亚组分析。结果共纳入419145例患者。总体而言,中位PH值和ED GCS无显著差异(15 vs 15, z = 0.00, P = 1.00),两者具有显著一致性(κw = 0.759, P < 0.001)。轻度脑外伤患者的PH值与ED GCS值基本一致(κw = 0.409, P < 0.001);对于中度脑损伤,有中度一致性(κw = 0.569, P < 0.001);对于重度脑外伤,两组间存在显著性差异(κw = 0.665, P < 0.001)。酒精和药物中毒、死亡率、需要ICP监测和运输时间与PH与ED GCS的差异有关,而ISS与此无关。ph和ED提供者对GCS的总体评分相似。虽然在某些亚组(轻度和重度脑外伤、死亡率、酒精或药物中毒、运输时间)中发现了一些微小的差异,但这些差异可能没有临床意义。
期刊介绍:
The American Surgeon is a monthly peer-reviewed publication published by the Southeastern Surgical Congress. Its area of concentration is clinical general surgery, as defined by the content areas of the American Board of Surgery: alimentary tract (including bariatric surgery), abdomen and its contents, breast, skin and soft tissue, endocrine system, solid organ transplantation, pediatric surgery, surgical critical care, surgical oncology (including head and neck surgery), trauma and emergency surgery, and vascular surgery.