To evaluate the effectiveness and the use of Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) and Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) score by nurses in the follow-up and evaluation of patients who admitted to neurosurgical intensive care unit for cranial surgery or head trauma.Material and Methods:
The study was performed at a neurosurgical intensive care unit. Sample size was calculated 47 patients as 5% a, 95% Power and values less than 0.5 at correlation were accepted nonsense. In the first 24 hours, Karnofsky Performance Scale and APACHE II Score were applied to patients who were admitted to intensive care unit for cranial surgery or head trauma. Also FOUR and GCS were applied by two different nurses twice a day. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, Pearson Correlation and Cronbachs Alpha Security Index analyses were used to evaluate the data.Results:
Concordance is above 0.810 and correlation is above 0.837 in between GCS and FOUR score evaluation results of nurses. Correlation of two different evaluation at every shift for GCS is 0.887, and for FOUR is 0.827 and above. Karnofsky Performance Scale correlation with FOUR and GCS scores of patients at admitting and discharging from intensive care unit is 0.709 and above. The correlation between APACHE II and FOUR is 0.851; between APACHE II and GCS is 0.853. There is no difference between the evaluations of two scores and two nurses statistically.Conclusion:
Concordance between nurses was found high both GCS and FOUR. The FOUR score is as effective as GCS on the follow-up of patients who are managed in the neurosurgical intensive care units.