Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Latest content
    • Latest content
  • Archive
  • About the journal
    • About the journal
    • Editorial board
    • Information for authors
    • FAQs
    • Thank you to our reviewers
    • The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma
  • Submit a paper
    • Online submission site
    • Information for authors
  • Email alerts
    • Email alerts
  • Help
    • Contact us
    • Feedback form
    • Reprints
    • Permissions
    • Advertising
  • BMJ Journals

User menu

  • Login

Search

  • Advanced search
  • BMJ Journals
  • Login
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
TSACO

Advanced Search

  • Latest content
    • Latest content
  • Archive
  • About the journal
    • About the journal
    • Editorial board
    • Information for authors
    • FAQs
    • Thank you to our reviewers
    • The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma
  • Submit a paper
    • Online submission site
    • Information for authors
  • Email alerts
    • Email alerts
  • Help
    • Contact us
    • Feedback form
    • Reprints
    • Permissions
    • Advertising
Open Access

Incorporating age improves the Glasgow Coma Scale score for predicting mortality from traumatic brain injury

Kristin Salottolo, Ripul Panchal, Robert M Madayag, Laxmi Dhakal, William Rosenberg, Kaysie L Banton, David Hamilton, David Bar-Or
DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2020-000641 Published 11 February 2021
Kristin Salottolo
1Trauma Research, Swedish Medical Center, Englewood, Colorado, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ripul Panchal
2Neurosurgery, Medical Center of Plano, Plano, Texas, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert M Madayag
3Trauma Services Department, St Anthony Hospital and Medical Campus, Lakewood, Colorado, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laxmi Dhakal
4Neurosurgery, Wesley Medical Center, Wichita, Kansas, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
William Rosenberg
5Neurosurgery, Research Medical Center, Kansas City, Missouri, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kaysie L Banton
6Trauma Services Department, Swedish Medical Center, Englewood, Colorado, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David Hamilton
7Trauma Services Department, Penrose Hospital, Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David Bar-Or
1Trauma Research, Swedish Medical Center, Englewood, Colorado, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Supplementary Materials
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Age distribution of 539,032 patients with traumatic brain injury, ages 10–89.

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    Percent mortality by age decade and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) risk category.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Supplementary Materials
  • Additional Files
  • Table 1

    Conditional probability of in-hospital mortality (%) by age and ED GCS score—development set

    Mortality (%) by GCSTeens
    (n=37,515)
    20s
    (n=62,348)
    30s
    (n=42,162)
    40s
    (n=44,780)
    50s
    (n=57,764)
    60s
    (n=51,328)
    70s
    (n=51,338)
    80s
    (n=56,713)
    320.5625.0725.1328.8440.7155.0768.0975.46
    415.8819.6119.6722.8233.3747.2060.8869.17
    513.2116.4316.4819.2428.7641.8855.6464.39
    68.2310.3910.4212.3219.2229.8142.5151.59
    76.027.657.679.1214.5323.2834.5643.22
    84.655.935.947.0911.4518.7528.6636.68
    93.784.834.855.809.4415.6924.4731.84
    103.124.004.014.817.8813.2521.0027.71
    112.433.123.133.766.2110.5717.0622.87
    121.832.352.362.834.718.1113.3118.13
    131.341.731.742.093.496.0610.0913.93
    140.670.870.871.051.763.115.297.45
    150.310.400.400.480.821.452.493.55
    • ED, emergency department; GCS, Glasgow Coma Scale.

  • Table 2

    Revised GCS risk categories for mortality based on age

    ED GCSStandardRevised GCS category, by age
    GCS category10–1920s and 30s40s50s60s70s80s
    3SevereHigh (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)
    4SevereHigh (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)
    5SevereHigh (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)
    6SevereModerateModerateHigh (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)
    7SevereModerateModerateModerateHigh (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)
    8SevereModerateModerateModerateHigh (severe)High (severe)High (severe)High (severe)
    9ModerateModerateModerateModerateModerateHigh (severe)High (severe)High (severe)
    10ModerateLow (mild)ModerateModerateModerateHigh (severe)High (severe)High (severe)
    11ModerateLow (mild)Low (mild)ModerateModerateModerateHigh (severe)High (severe)
    12ModerateLow (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)ModerateModerateHigh (severe)High (severe)
    13MildLow (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)ModerateModerateHigh (severe)
    14MildLow (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)ModerateModerate
    15MildLow (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)Low (mild)
    • ED, emergency department; GCS, Glasgow Coma Scale.

  • Table 3

    AUROC for outcomes using standard and revised GCS risk categories—validation set

    Populationn/NStandard
    GCS
    Revised GCSDifferenceP value
    Mortality5306/135,0840.7550.800−0.045<0.001
    Mortality, subsets
     Isolated TBI*586/17,5330.7140.766−0.052<0.001
     Not transferred4155/97,8190.7780.818−0.040<0.001
     Fall cause of injury2910/59,8600.7100.761−0.051<0.001
     Blunt mechanism4837/130,0980.7420.791−0.049<0.001
     Penetrating injury469/49860.8720.878−0.0060.136
    Neurosurgical procedure9504/135,0840.6450.657−0.013<0.001
    Unfavorable disposition37,563/135,0840.5890.648−0.059<0.001
    • Bolding denotes statistical significance with < 0.001.

    • *Isolated TBI defined by AIS scores ≤1 in non-head regions. AIS scores were only documented in the NTDB for 17.0% of patients.

    • AIS, Abbreviated Injury Scale; AUROC, area under the receiver operator characteristic curve; GCS, Glasgow Coma Scale; NTDB, National Trauma Data Bank; TBI, traumatic brain injury.

  • Table 4

    Percentage of patients whose revised GCS category differed from the standard GCS category, by age decile—validation set

    ED GCS (%)10–1920s30s40s50s60s70s80s
    3 (3.28)––––––––
    4 (0.36)––––––––
    5 (0.35)––––––––
    6 (0.79)0.85%1.04%1.03%–––––
    7 (0.88)0.99%1.46%1.20%0.86%––––
    8 (0.84)0.86%1.17%0.96%0.94%––––
    9 (0.81)–––––0.71%0.60%0.77%
    10 (1.03)0.79%––––1.04%0.99%1.19%
    11 (1.26)1.33%1.27%1.18%–––1.16%1.33%
    12 (1.62)1.34%1.73%1.84%1.71%––1.40%1.68%
    13 (3.48)–––––3.34%3.09%3.54%
    14 (15.43)––––––16.08%19.23%
    15 (69.87)––––––––
    Overall6.16%6.67%6.21%3.51%0.00%5.10%23.33%27.73%
    • The ‘–’ indicates the standard GCS category and revised GCS category overlapped; thus, the GCS revision did not affect patients in that combination of age decade and GCS score.

    • ED, emergency department; GCS, Glasgow Coma Scale.

Supplementary Materials

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Supplementary data

    [tsaco-2020-000641supp001.pdf]

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplementary Materials
  • Supplementary Data

    This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

    • Data supplement 1
PreviousNext
Back to top
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on TSACO.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Incorporating age improves the Glasgow Coma Scale score for predicting mortality from traumatic brain injury
(Your Name) has sent you a message from TSACO
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the TSACO web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Incorporating age improves the Glasgow Coma Scale score for predicting mortality from traumatic brain injury
Kristin Salottolo, Ripul Panchal, Robert M Madayag, Laxmi Dhakal, William Rosenberg, Kaysie L Banton, David Hamilton, David Bar-Or
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Feb 2021, 6 (1) e000641; DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2020-000641

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Cite This
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • Endnote
  • MLA
Loading
Incorporating age improves the Glasgow Coma Scale score for predicting mortality from traumatic brain injury
Kristin Salottolo, Ripul Panchal, Robert M Madayag, Laxmi Dhakal, William Rosenberg, Kaysie L Banton, David Hamilton, David Bar-Or
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Feb 2021, 6 (1) e000641; DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2020-000641
Download PDF

Share
Incorporating age improves the Glasgow Coma Scale score for predicting mortality from traumatic brain injury
Kristin Salottolo, Ripul Panchal, Robert M Madayag, Laxmi Dhakal, William Rosenberg, Kaysie L Banton, David Hamilton, David Bar-Or
Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open Feb 2021, 6 (1) e000641; DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2020-000641
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Respond to this article
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Background
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Bicyclists injured by automobiles: helmet use and the burden of injury
  • What happens after they survive? The role of anticoagulants and antiplatelets in IVC injuries
  • Building trauma capability: using geospatial analysis to consider military treatment facilities for trauma center development
Show more Original research

Similar Articles

 
 

CONTENT

  • Latest content
  • Archive
  • eLetters
  • Sign up for email alerts
  • RSS

JOURNAL

  • About the journal
  • Editorial board
  • Thank you to our reviewers
  • The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma

AUTHORS

  • Information for authors
  • Submit a paper
  • Track your article
  • Open Access at BMJ

HELP

  • Contact us
  • Reprints
  • Permissions
  • Advertising
  • Feedback form

©Copyright 2022 The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma