Validation of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale in Intracerebral Hemorrhage

IF 2.1 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Wendy Dusenbury, G. Tsivgoulis, Jason J. Chang, N. Goyal, Victoria Swatzell, A. Alexandrov, P. Lyden, A. Alexandrov
{"title":"Validation of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale in Intracerebral Hemorrhage","authors":"Wendy Dusenbury, G. Tsivgoulis, Jason J. Chang, N. Goyal, Victoria Swatzell, A. Alexandrov, P. Lyden, A. Alexandrov","doi":"10.1161/svin.123.000834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n We sought to determine if the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) has a greater discriminative power than Glasgow coma scale (GCS) to identify patients at risk of poor early functional outcomes and large hematoma volumes.\n \n \n \n \n We prospectively collected clinical assessments, imaging, and outcome data in consecutive patients with intracerebral hemorrhage, and determined the ability of GCS and NIHSS to predict poor functional outcome (modified Rankin scale 3–6) and hematoma volume >30 cm\n 3\n using receiver operating characteristics analysis, C‐statistics, and the DeLong test.\n \n \n \n \n \n We studied 672 patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (mean age 62±14 years; 56% men; median intracerebral hemorrhage score=1, interquartile range (IQR) 0–2; median intracerebral hemorrhage volume 7 cm\n 3\n , IQR 2–19) with median NIHSS of 8 (IQR 3–18) and GCS 15 (IQR 7–15). NIHSS correlated strongly to GCS (r=−0.773;\n P\n <0.001). Admission NIHSS (C‐statistic: 0.91; 95% CI, 0.89–0.93) predicted better than GCS (0.78; 95% CI, 0.75–0.81) discharge poor functional outcome (DeLong test\n P\n <0.001). NIHSS (0.82; 95% CI, 0.78–0.86) also discriminated better than GCS (0.78; 95% CI, 0.73–0.83) patients with large hematoma volume (DeLong test\n P\n =0.029).\n \n \n \n \n The NIHSS has a greater discriminative power than GCS to identify patients at risk of poor early functional outcomes and large hematoma volumes.\n","PeriodicalId":74875,"journal":{"name":"Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/svin.123.000834","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

We sought to determine if the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) has a greater discriminative power than Glasgow coma scale (GCS) to identify patients at risk of poor early functional outcomes and large hematoma volumes. We prospectively collected clinical assessments, imaging, and outcome data in consecutive patients with intracerebral hemorrhage, and determined the ability of GCS and NIHSS to predict poor functional outcome (modified Rankin scale 3–6) and hematoma volume >30 cm 3 using receiver operating characteristics analysis, C‐statistics, and the DeLong test. We studied 672 patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (mean age 62±14 years; 56% men; median intracerebral hemorrhage score=1, interquartile range (IQR) 0–2; median intracerebral hemorrhage volume 7 cm 3 , IQR 2–19) with median NIHSS of 8 (IQR 3–18) and GCS 15 (IQR 7–15). NIHSS correlated strongly to GCS (r=−0.773; P <0.001). Admission NIHSS (C‐statistic: 0.91; 95% CI, 0.89–0.93) predicted better than GCS (0.78; 95% CI, 0.75–0.81) discharge poor functional outcome (DeLong test P <0.001). NIHSS (0.82; 95% CI, 0.78–0.86) also discriminated better than GCS (0.78; 95% CI, 0.73–0.83) patients with large hematoma volume (DeLong test P =0.029). The NIHSS has a greater discriminative power than GCS to identify patients at risk of poor early functional outcomes and large hematoma volumes.
美国国立卫生研究院脑出血卒中量表的验证
我们试图确定美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)是否比格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)具有更大的判别力,以识别早期功能不良和血肿体积大的患者。我们前瞻性地收集了连续脑出血患者的临床评估、影像学和结果数据,并使用受试者操作特征分析、C‐统计量和DeLong检验确定了GCS和NIHSS预测不良功能结果(改良Rankin量表3-6)和血肿体积>30 cm 3的能力。我们研究了672名脑出血患者(平均年龄62±14岁;56%为男性;脑出血中位得分=1,四分位数间距(IQR)0-2;中位脑出血量7 cm 3,IQR 2–19),中位NIHSS为8(IQR 3–18),GCS为15(IQR 7–15)。NIHSS与GCS密切相关(r=−0.773;P<0.001)。入院NIHSS(C统计:0.91;95%CI,0.89–0.93)比GCS(0.78;95%CI,0.75–0.81)更好地预测出院不良功能结果(DeLong检验P<0.001在识别早期功能不良和血肿体积大的风险患者方面,GCS具有比GCS更大的辨别力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信