Analyzing outcome of treatment of severe head injury: A review and update on advancing the use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale
Analyzing outcome of treatment of severe head injury: A review and update on advancing the use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale
复制标题
DOI：
10.1089/neu.1998.15.587
复制
发表时间：
1998-08-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Jennett, B
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Teasdale, GM;Pettigrew, LEL;Jennett, B
格拉斯哥预后量表（GOS），在其描述二十年后，仍然是最广泛使用的方法，分析结果的一系列严重的头部受伤的病人。本综述考虑了使用GOS的局限性，并讨论了一种新的评估方法，即使用结构化的基于问卷的访谈，可以对扩展的八点量表（GOSE）和原始的五点方法进行评估，在每种情况下，观察者之间具有高度的一致性。这些任务与世界卫生组织损伤、残疾和障碍分类的原则相一致，其有效性得到神经心理学测试和一般健康状况评估结果的有力支持。需要允许受伤前存在的残疾，受伤后的评估时间有关的问题，并细分成“有利”和“不利”的类别的规模进行了讨论。它的结论是，在其改进的结构化格式，格拉斯哥结局量表应仍然是主要的方法来评估结果的试验管理重型颅脑损伤。
The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), two decades after its description, remains the most widely used method of analyzing outcome in series of severely head-injured patients. This review considers limitations recognized in the use of the GOS and discusses a new approach to assessment, using a structured questionnaire-based interview, Assignments can be made to an extended eight-point scale (GOSE) as well as the original five-point approach-in each case, with a high degree of interobserver consistency. The assignments are coherent with the principles of the World Health Organization classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps, and their validity is supported by strong associations with the results of neuropsychological testing and assessment of general health status. The need to allow for disability existing before injury, issues concerning the time of assessment after injury, and subdivisions of the scale into "favorable" and "unfavorable" categories are discussed. It is concluded that, in its improved structured format, the Glasgow Outcome Scale should remain the primary method of assessing outcome in trials of the management of severe head injury.