Comparison of interrater reliability and predictive validity of FOUR score and Glasgow Coma Scale in multi traumatic patients

Background: Multi traumatic injuries impose health care concern and major burden for society. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is a routine scale for assessing levels of consciousness and prognosis of traumatic patients. The Full outline of unresponsiveness (FOUR) score is a new coma scale developed to overcome the limitations of GCS. In this prospective study, we aimed to compare the predicting outcomes and inter-rater reliability of the GCS and FOUR score in a group of multi traumatic patients. 96 consecutive multi trauma patients admitted in emergency departments were enrolled in the study. GCS and FOUR score were documented on arrival to the emergency room. Their correlation with patients ‘outcomes was analyzed. In terms of predictive power for in-hospital mortality, calculated mortality rate was 33.1 for FOUR score and 30.21 for GCS. Mean value of GCS and FOUR score were 14.83 and 13.68, respectively. Mortality rate was determined 9.3% and mean duration of hospitalization was 7.86±8.73 days. In addition, inter-rater reliability was determined κ = 0.84 ± 0.01 for GCS score and κ = 0.86 ± 0.01 for FOUR score rating. Inter-rater reliability and outcome predictability for FOUR score was superior to the GCS in this study, therefore FOUR score can be considered as a viable alternative to the GCS in the emergency department by accurately predicting outcome and improving the quality of management in trauma patients.