• Phuping Akavipat, Pimwan Sookplung, Pranee Kaewsingha, and Patcharin Maunsaiyat.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Prasat Neurological Institute, Bangkok, Thailand. ppakvp@hotmail.com
• Acta Med Okayama. 2011 Jun 1;65(3):205-10.

AbstractTo identify the diagnostic properties of the Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) score and the discharge outcome, 318 patients were studied. The evaluators rated the patients on admission or when they had mental status alteration with the FOUR score. The course of treatment was determined based on the clinical. The mortality rate and Glasgow Outcome Scale were recorded. Adjusted regression models and prognostic performance were tested by calculation of the receiver operating characteristic curve. One-hundred and twenty-two patients (40.1%) had a poor outcome defined as a Glasgow Outcome Scale score from 3-5, and 38 patients (12.5%) died. The area under the characteristic curve (AUC) for poor outcome and in-hospital mortality were 0.88 (95% CI, 0.83-0.92) and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87-0.97). The cut-off point of 14 showed sensitivity and specificity of the total FOUR score predicting poor outcomes at 0.77 (95% CI, 0.69-0.84) and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.90-0.97), while the cut-off point of 10 showed the values for in-hospital mortality at 0.71 (95% CI, 0.55-0.83) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.90-0.96). The total FOUR score showed satisfactory prognostic value for predicting outcome. The cut-off points for the poor outcome and in-hospital mortality are 14 and 10, respectively.

17 keywords...

hide…