Interrater reliability of Glasgow Coma Scale scores in the emergency department - 25/08/11
, David G Reiley, MD, Steven M Green, MDAbstract |
Study objective |
Emergency physicians often use the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) to help guide decisions in patient care, yet the reliability of the GCS has never been tested in a typical broad sample of emergency department (ED) patients. We determined the interrater reliability of the GCS between emergency physicians when adult patients with altered levels of consciousness are assessed.
Methods |
In this prospective observational study at a university Level I trauma center, we enrolled a convenience sample of ED patients older than 17 years who presented with an altered level of consciousness. Two residency-trained attending emergency physicians independently assessed and recorded the GCS score and its components (eye, verbal, and motor) in blinded fashion within a 5-minute period. Data were analyzed for interrater reliability by using standard ordinal calculations. We also created scatter plots and Bland-Altman plots for each GCS component and for the GCS score.
Results |
One hundred thirty-one patients were screened and enrolled in the study, with 15 excluded because of protocol violations. Of the 116 remaining patients, the agreement percentage for exact total GCS was 32% (τ-b=0.739; Spearman ρ=0.864; Spearman ρ2=75%). Agreement percentage for GCS components were eye 74% (τ-b=0.715; Spearman ρ=0.757; Spearman ρ2=57%), verbal 55% (τ-b=0.587; Spearman ρ=0.665; Spearman ρ2=44%), and motor 72% (τ-b=0.742; Spearman ρ=0.808; Spearman ρ2=65%). Our Spearman's analyses found that only approximately half (44% to 65%) of the observed variance could be explained by the relationship between the paired component measures. For GCS components, only 55% to 74% of paired measures were identical, and 6% to 17% of them were 2 or more points apart.
Conclusion |
We found only moderate degrees of interrater agreement for the GCS and its components.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
| Author contributions: MRG and SMG conceived of and designed the study. MRG oversaw the data collection. SMG provided statistical advice on study design and analyzed the data. DGR assisted with data collection and manuscript development. All authors participated in drafting the manuscript and contributed to its revisions. MRG and SMG take responsibility for the paper as a whole. Presented at the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine western regional meeting, Scottsdale, AZ, April 2003; and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine national meeting, Boston, MA, May 2003. The authors report this study did not receive any outside funding or support. Reprints not available from the authors. |
Vol 43 - N° 2
P. 215-223 - février 2004 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?
