Isfahan University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Predictive Validity and Inter-Rater Reliability of the Persian Version of Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Among Unconscious Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury in an Intensive Care Unit Publisher Pubmed



Momenyan S1 ; Mousavi SM2 ; Dadkhahtehrani T3 ; Sarvi F4 ; Heidarifar R5 ; Kabiri F6 ; Mohebi E2 ; Koohbor M2
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, Qom University of Medical Sciences, Qom, Iran
  2. 2. Qom University of Medical Sciences, Qom, Iran
  3. 3. Academic Member of Midwifery, Midwifery Department, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
  4. 4. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Science, Hamadan, Iran
  5. 5. Medicine, Quran and Hadith Research Center, Bagiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  6. 6. Qom Branch Azad University, Qom, Iran

Source: Neurocritical Care Published:2017


Abstract

Introduction: The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) has some limitations when evaluating the unconscious patient. This study aims to validate the Persian version of the FOUR (Full Outline of Unresponsiveness) score as a proposed substitute. Methods: Two nurses, two nursing students, and two physicians scored the prepared Persian version of the FOUR and GCS in 84 patients with acute brain injury. The inter-rater agreement for the FOUR and the GCS scores was evaluated by the weighted kappa (κw). The outcome prediction power of the scales was assessed by the area under the curve (AUC) in the ROC curve. Results: The inter-rater agreement of the FOUR was excellent (κw = 0.923, 95 % CI, 0.874–0.971) and comparable with the one of the GCS (κw = 0.938, 95 % CI, 0.889–0.987). The area under the curve (AUC) for predicting in-hospital mortality (modified Rankin Scale: 6) was 0.835 for the FOUR (95 % CI, 0.739–0.907) and 0.772 for the GCS (95 % CI, 0.668–0.856) (P = 0.01). AUC for predicting poor outcome (modified Rankin Scale: 3–6) for the total FOUR score was 0.983 (95 % CI, 0.928–0.999), which is comparable with 0.987 for the total GCS score (95 % CI, 0.934–1.000). Conclusions: The researchers conclude that the Persian version of the FOUR score is a reliable and valid scale to assess unconscious patients with traumatic brain injury and can be substituted for the GCS. © 2017, Springer Science+Business Media New York.
Experts (# of related papers)
Other Related Docs
20. Different Stroke Scales; Which Scale or Scales Should Be Used?, Caspian Journal of Internal Medicine (2021)
30. Asian Study of Cerebral Venous Thrombosis, Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases (2019)
33. Validation of Critical Care Pain Observation Tool in Patients Hospitalized in Surgical Wards, Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research (2016)
43. Pregnancy and Puerperium-Related Strokes in Asian Women, Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases (2013)