The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) is the most widely used outcome measure after traumatic brain injury, but it is increasingly recognized to have important limitations. It is proposed that shortcomings of the GOS can be addressed by adopting a standard format for the interview used to assign outcome. A set of guidelines are outlined that are directed at the main problems encountered in applying the GOS. The guidelines cover the general principles underlying the use of the GOS and common practical problems of applying the scale. Structured interview schedules are described for both the five-point GOS and an extended eight-point GOS (GOSE). An interrater reliability study of the structured interviews for the GOS and GOSE yielded weighted kappa values of 0.89 and 0.85, respectively. It is concluded that assessment of the GOS using a standard format with a written protocol is practical and reliable.
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) can have lifelong and dynamic effects on health and wellbeing. Research on the long-term consequences emphasises that, for many patients, TBI should be conceptualised as a chronic health condition. Evidence suggests that functional outcomes after TBI can show improvement or deterioration up to two decades after injury, and rates of all-cause mortality remain elevated for many years. Furthermore, TBI represents a risk factor for a variety of neurological illnesses, including epilepsy, stroke, and neurodegenerative disease. With respect to neurodegeneration after TBI, post-mortem studies on the long-term neuropathology after injury have identified complex persisting and evolving abnormalities best described as polypathology, which includes chronic traumatic encephalopathy. Despite growing awareness of the lifelong consequences of TBI, substantial gaps in research exist. Improvements are therefore needed in understanding chronic pathologies and their implications for survivors of TBI, which could inform long-term health management in this sizeable patient population.
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.
A procedure is described which gives a measure of memory span for patterns. Results are presented from a study of four age groups: 5+, 7+, 11+, and adults. Pattern span increases rapidly between the ages of 5 and 11, by which time it is at the adult level. Span is decreased by an interpolated interfering task, and there is memory decay over a 10 second unfilled interval. The results are interpreted as evidence for a system for representing patterns which is shared by short‐ and long‐term visual memory, but which is distinct from systems for verbal representation.
The findings indicate good test-retest and interrater reliability for the structured interviews. In most circumstances a structured interview over the telephone can provide a reliable assessment of the GOS, and can safely be substituted for in person contact.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.