Functional outcome scales in traumatic brain injury: A comparison of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (extended) and the functional status examination

Anne M. Hudak, R. Ruth Caesar, Alan B. Frol, Kim Krueger, Caryn R. Harper, Nancy R. Temkin, Sureyya S. Dikmen, Mary Carlile, Christopher Madden, Ramon Diaz-Arrastia

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

52 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Clinical trials aimed at developing therapies for traumatic brain injury (TBI) require outcome measures that are reliable, validated, and easily administered. The most widely used of these measures, the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and the GOS-Extended (GOS-E), have been criticized as suffering from ceiling effects. In an attempt to develop a more useful and dynamic outcome measure, the Functional Status Examination (FSE) was developed, which grades outcome across 10 functional domains. The FSE has been demonstrated to be reliable and sensitive in monitoring recovery after TBI. This manuscript compares FSE with GOS-E in a cohort of patients with a wide range of injury severities. 177 individuals who survived at least 6 months after TBI were studied. The FSE and GOS-E were administered 6-12 months after injury. FSE and GOS-E scores correlated well with each other. FSE scores were distributed throughout the range, indicating that ceiling and floor effects were not present. Physiologic measures of injury severity (Glasgow Coma Score [GCS]) did not correlate with anatomic measures (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] and Injury Severity Score [ISS]). GCS correlated weakly with both outcome measures, but AIS/ISS did not. We conclude that FSE and GOS-E are reliable outcome measures for TBI survivors, and FSE may offer some advantages over GOS-E due its ability to provide a more detailed description of deficits. The majority of the variance in outcome is not accounted for by currently available measures of injury severity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1319-1326
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Neurotrauma
Volume22
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2005

Fingerprint

Glasgow Outcome Scale
Abbreviated Injury Scale
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Injury Severity Score
Wounds and Injuries
Coma
Traumatic Brain Injury
Survivors
Clinical Trials

Keywords

  • Abbreviated Injury Scale
  • Functional Status Examination
  • Glasgow Outcome Scale
  • Injury Severity Score
  • Traumatic brain injury

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Neuroscience(all)

Cite this

Hudak, A. M., Caesar, R. R., Frol, A. B., Krueger, K., Harper, C. R., Temkin, N. R., ... Diaz-Arrastia, R. (2005). Functional outcome scales in traumatic brain injury: A comparison of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (extended) and the functional status examination. Journal of Neurotrauma, 22(11), 1319-1326. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2005.22.1319

Functional outcome scales in traumatic brain injury : A comparison of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (extended) and the functional status examination. / Hudak, Anne M.; Caesar, R. Ruth; Frol, Alan B.; Krueger, Kim; Harper, Caryn R.; Temkin, Nancy R.; Dikmen, Sureyya S.; Carlile, Mary; Madden, Christopher; Diaz-Arrastia, Ramon.

In: Journal of Neurotrauma, Vol. 22, No. 11, 11.2005, p. 1319-1326.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hudak, AM, Caesar, RR, Frol, AB, Krueger, K, Harper, CR, Temkin, NR, Dikmen, SS, Carlile, M, Madden, C & Diaz-Arrastia, R 2005, 'Functional outcome scales in traumatic brain injury: A comparison of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (extended) and the functional status examination', Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 22, no. 11, pp. 1319-1326. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2005.22.1319
Hudak, Anne M. ; Caesar, R. Ruth ; Frol, Alan B. ; Krueger, Kim ; Harper, Caryn R. ; Temkin, Nancy R. ; Dikmen, Sureyya S. ; Carlile, Mary ; Madden, Christopher ; Diaz-Arrastia, Ramon. / Functional outcome scales in traumatic brain injury : A comparison of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (extended) and the functional status examination. In: Journal of Neurotrauma. 2005 ; Vol. 22, No. 11. pp. 1319-1326.
@article{f830352871874ed4afbe83d05b992ce7,
title = "Functional outcome scales in traumatic brain injury: A comparison of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (extended) and the functional status examination",
abstract = "Clinical trials aimed at developing therapies for traumatic brain injury (TBI) require outcome measures that are reliable, validated, and easily administered. The most widely used of these measures, the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and the GOS-Extended (GOS-E), have been criticized as suffering from ceiling effects. In an attempt to develop a more useful and dynamic outcome measure, the Functional Status Examination (FSE) was developed, which grades outcome across 10 functional domains. The FSE has been demonstrated to be reliable and sensitive in monitoring recovery after TBI. This manuscript compares FSE with GOS-E in a cohort of patients with a wide range of injury severities. 177 individuals who survived at least 6 months after TBI were studied. The FSE and GOS-E were administered 6-12 months after injury. FSE and GOS-E scores correlated well with each other. FSE scores were distributed throughout the range, indicating that ceiling and floor effects were not present. Physiologic measures of injury severity (Glasgow Coma Score [GCS]) did not correlate with anatomic measures (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] and Injury Severity Score [ISS]). GCS correlated weakly with both outcome measures, but AIS/ISS did not. We conclude that FSE and GOS-E are reliable outcome measures for TBI survivors, and FSE may offer some advantages over GOS-E due its ability to provide a more detailed description of deficits. The majority of the variance in outcome is not accounted for by currently available measures of injury severity.",
keywords = "Abbreviated Injury Scale, Functional Status Examination, Glasgow Outcome Scale, Injury Severity Score, Traumatic brain injury",
author = "Hudak, {Anne M.} and Caesar, {R. Ruth} and Frol, {Alan B.} and Kim Krueger and Harper, {Caryn R.} and Temkin, {Nancy R.} and Dikmen, {Sureyya S.} and Mary Carlile and Christopher Madden and Ramon Diaz-Arrastia",
year = "2005",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1089/neu.2005.22.1319",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "1319--1326",
journal = "Journal of Neurotrauma",
issn = "0897-7151",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Functional outcome scales in traumatic brain injury

T2 - A comparison of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (extended) and the functional status examination

AU - Hudak, Anne M.

AU - Caesar, R. Ruth

AU - Frol, Alan B.

AU - Krueger, Kim

AU - Harper, Caryn R.

AU - Temkin, Nancy R.

AU - Dikmen, Sureyya S.

AU - Carlile, Mary

AU - Madden, Christopher

AU - Diaz-Arrastia, Ramon

PY - 2005/11

Y1 - 2005/11

N2 - Clinical trials aimed at developing therapies for traumatic brain injury (TBI) require outcome measures that are reliable, validated, and easily administered. The most widely used of these measures, the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and the GOS-Extended (GOS-E), have been criticized as suffering from ceiling effects. In an attempt to develop a more useful and dynamic outcome measure, the Functional Status Examination (FSE) was developed, which grades outcome across 10 functional domains. The FSE has been demonstrated to be reliable and sensitive in monitoring recovery after TBI. This manuscript compares FSE with GOS-E in a cohort of patients with a wide range of injury severities. 177 individuals who survived at least 6 months after TBI were studied. The FSE and GOS-E were administered 6-12 months after injury. FSE and GOS-E scores correlated well with each other. FSE scores were distributed throughout the range, indicating that ceiling and floor effects were not present. Physiologic measures of injury severity (Glasgow Coma Score [GCS]) did not correlate with anatomic measures (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] and Injury Severity Score [ISS]). GCS correlated weakly with both outcome measures, but AIS/ISS did not. We conclude that FSE and GOS-E are reliable outcome measures for TBI survivors, and FSE may offer some advantages over GOS-E due its ability to provide a more detailed description of deficits. The majority of the variance in outcome is not accounted for by currently available measures of injury severity.

AB - Clinical trials aimed at developing therapies for traumatic brain injury (TBI) require outcome measures that are reliable, validated, and easily administered. The most widely used of these measures, the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and the GOS-Extended (GOS-E), have been criticized as suffering from ceiling effects. In an attempt to develop a more useful and dynamic outcome measure, the Functional Status Examination (FSE) was developed, which grades outcome across 10 functional domains. The FSE has been demonstrated to be reliable and sensitive in monitoring recovery after TBI. This manuscript compares FSE with GOS-E in a cohort of patients with a wide range of injury severities. 177 individuals who survived at least 6 months after TBI were studied. The FSE and GOS-E were administered 6-12 months after injury. FSE and GOS-E scores correlated well with each other. FSE scores were distributed throughout the range, indicating that ceiling and floor effects were not present. Physiologic measures of injury severity (Glasgow Coma Score [GCS]) did not correlate with anatomic measures (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] and Injury Severity Score [ISS]). GCS correlated weakly with both outcome measures, but AIS/ISS did not. We conclude that FSE and GOS-E are reliable outcome measures for TBI survivors, and FSE may offer some advantages over GOS-E due its ability to provide a more detailed description of deficits. The majority of the variance in outcome is not accounted for by currently available measures of injury severity.

KW - Abbreviated Injury Scale

KW - Functional Status Examination

KW - Glasgow Outcome Scale

KW - Injury Severity Score

KW - Traumatic brain injury

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=28244468391&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=28244468391&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/neu.2005.22.1319

DO - 10.1089/neu.2005.22.1319

M3 - Article

C2 - 16305320

AN - SCOPUS:28244468391

VL - 22

SP - 1319

EP - 1326

JO - Journal of Neurotrauma

JF - Journal of Neurotrauma

SN - 0897-7151

IS - 11

ER -