Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2014 Sep-Oct;29(5):400-6. doi: 10.1097/HTR.0b013e31828a0a45.

Application and clinical utility of the Glasgow Coma Scale over time: a study employing the NIDRR traumatic brain injury model systems database.

Author information

University of Alabama at Birmingham (Drs Barker and Novack); Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute, Elkins Park, Pennsylvania (Dr Whyte); Craig Hospital (Dr Pretz) and Traumatic Brain Injury National Data and Statistical Center (Dr Pretz), Englewood, Colorado; TIRR Memorial Hermann, Houston, Texas (Dr Sherer); University of Washington, Seattle (Dr Temkin); Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis (Dr Hammond); Carolinas Rehabilitation, Charlotte, North Carolina (Dr Hammond); and University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado (Ms Saad).



To examine possible changes in Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores related to changes in emergency management, such as intubation and chemical paralysis, and the potential impact on outcome prediction.


10 228 patients from the Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems national database.


Retrospective study examining 5-year epochs from 1987 to 2012.


GCS score assessed in the Emergency Department (GCS scores for intubated, but not paralyzed, patients were estimated with a formula using 2 of the 3 GCS components), Outcome: Functional Independence Measure (FIM) assessed at rehabilitation admission.


The rate of intubation prior to GCS scoring averaged 43% and did not increase across time. However, a clear increase over time was observed in the use of paralytics or heavy sedatives, with 27% of patients receiving this intervention in the most recent epoch. Estimated GCS scores classified 69% of intubated patients as severely brain injured and 8% as mildly injured. The GCS accounted for a modest, yet consistent, amount of variability (approximately 5%-7%) in FIM scores during most epochs.


Given the frequency of intubation and/or paralysis following brain injury in this sample, estimating GCS or exploring other means to gauge injury severity is beneficial, particularly because a portion likely did not sustain severe brain injury. There is no evidence for declining predictive utility of the GCS over time.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Wolters Kluwer
    Loading ...
    Support Center