Sensitivity and Specificity of Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Score and Glasgow Coma Scale towards Patients’ Outcomes at the Intensive Care Units

Silvitasari, Ika; Purnomo, Hery; Sujianto, Untung

doi:10.9790/1959-0601031013

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(13 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Meanwhile, research conducted by Silvitasari et al obtained the results of the reliability level between the FOUR score and GCS of 0.891 and 0.973, respectively, where both instruments were included in the excellent category (0.8 -1.0) (Silvitasari, 2016;Sujianto et al, 2017). In other words, it can be concluded that there is no difference in the perception of observers who conduct assessments using GCS and FOUR score.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The level of reliability of the four (full outline of unresponsiveness) score in assessing the level of consciousness of stroke patients

Wiyono,

Utami,

Ismail

2023

jika

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Similarly to the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), the FOUR score can evaluate the level of awareness in stroke patients. This research aimed to evaluate the accuracy of using the FOUR score instrument to the more commonly used GCS method for determining a patient's degree of consciousness in the ER following a stroke. This research method is an analytic observational study with a total of 102 samples, namely stroke patients in the emergency room of RSUD dr. Soehadi prijonegoro Sragen Regency. The process of collecting research data was carried out by three enumerators to see the level of reliability using instruments in the form of awareness assessment observation sheets and standard FOUR score operational procedures. The study found that the FOUR score instrument had a total reliability of 0.830 as measured by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) test, whereas the GCS reliability was 0.864. This study found that the FOUR score and GCS were reliable in determining whether or not a stroke patient was conscious. This finding can be understood to mean that there was no discrepancy in the three evaluators' assessments of consciousness when using the FOUR score or GCS. The recommendation of this study is that follow-up needs to be done to find the sensitivity and specificity values of the FOUR score instrument as an instrument for assessing the awareness of stroke patients.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The level of reliability of the four (full outline of unresponsiveness) score in assessing the level of consciousness of stroke patients

Wiyono,

Utami,

Ismail

2023

jika

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The result of this research was in line with Silvitasari et al, research, which obtained the sensitivity value of Four Score 0,861 and specificity of 0.816. 9 Meanwhile, the sensitivity value was GCS 0.722 and specificity was 0.737. Research conducted by Baratloo also obtained the results of sensitivity and specificity of four score higher than GCS.…”

Section: Sensitivity Specificity Positive Predictive Value and Negmentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparison of glasgow coma scale with full outline of unresponsiveness score in measuring consciousness level of endotracheal tube intubated patient in the intensive care unit

Oktarina

Simajuntak

2018

Int J Res Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Assessment of consciousness level is a basic ability that medical personnel, especially doctors and nurses shall master. It is due to assessment of consciousness as a basis of clinical decision making and determining the patient's prognosis. There are various types of scales to measure consciousness level of patient. One of the most famous and most widely applied is Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS). However, the use of GCS is less precise in measuring consciousness level of patients, especially in Endotracheal Tube Intubated patients (ETT). Another measure of consciousness assessment is FOUR Score. In contrast to GCS, the use of four score as a measurement tool for consciousness assessment is still not yet familiar especially in Indonesia. Four score has different component with GCS where the four score component has no assessment of verbal response but it has brainstem and respiratory pattern assessment components. Methods: This research was an observational research using prospective non-experimental approach. The sampling technique used was consecutive sampling with a sample size of 33 people. Observation of the sample was undertaken at the same time. The instruments used in this research were GCS and FOUR Score observation sheet. Data analysis was performed by measuring the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and ROC. Results: Four Score has sensitivity of 86.7 specificity of 83.3 predictive positive value of 81.3 and negative predictive value 88.2 and under curve area of 0.848. Meanwhile, GCS has sensitivity of 80.0, specificity of 77.8, predictive positive value of 75, and negative predictive value of 82.4 and under curve area of 0.819. Conclusions: Four scores have a better assessment in measuring the consciousness level of ETT intubated patients.

show abstract

The current significance of the FOUR score: A systematic review and critical analysis of the literature

Anestis

Tsitsopoulos

Tsonidis

et al. 2020

Journal of the Neurological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensitivity and Specificity of Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Score and Glasgow Coma Scale towards Patients’ Outcomes at the Intensive Care Units

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

The level of reliability of the four (full outline of unresponsiveness) score in assessing the level of consciousness of stroke patients

The level of reliability of the four (full outline of unresponsiveness) score in assessing the level of consciousness of stroke patients

Comparison of glasgow coma scale with full outline of unresponsiveness score in measuring consciousness level of endotracheal tube intubated patient in the intensive care unit

The current significance of the FOUR score: A systematic review and critical analysis of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About