nursing-edu-2017-scientifictracks-abstracts

20 / 47

Page 49
Notes:
conferenceseries.com
Volume 6, Issue 3 (Suppl) J Nurs Care
ISSN: 2167-1168 JNC, an open access journal Nursing Edu 2017
May 22- 24, 2017
May 22- 24, 2017 Osaka, Japan
20th World Nursing
Education Conference
Full outline of un-responsiveness scale versus modified Glasgow Coma Scale in predicting discharge
outcomes in disturbed consciousness patients
Samah A Shalaby1, Noha Ali2 and Nagwa A Reda 1
1Alexandria University, Egypt
2Assuit University Hospital, Egypt
Background: Disturbed consciousness level is common in critically ill patients. Neurological assessment, evaluation of disturbed
consciousness patients and their outcomes prediction are usually challenging for critical care nurses. Scoring systems have been
developed to obtain a fast and comprehensive assessment, to facilitate communication among examiners, to triage and monitor
changes for therapeutic decisions, and to provide prognostic information about the patients.
Aim: The aim is to compare between the full outline of un-responsiveness scale and the modified Glasgow Coma Scale in predicting
discharge outcomes in disturbed consciousness patients.
Materials & Methods: A descriptive design was followed in this study. The study was conducted at the Trauma Intensive Care Unit,
Neurological Intensive Care Unit and Neurosurgery Intensive Care Unit in Assuit University Hospital. Three tools were utilized to
collect the data namely: Tool I “Patients Profile Data Form”, Tool II “Level of Consciousness Assessment” and Tool III “Discharge
Data Assessment record”.
Results: The patients' outcomes on discharge were found to be: Three patients regained their consciousness and discharged to home;
more than one third regained their consciousness and transferred to ward; some of them experienced co-morbidities and transferred
to ward; and nearly half of them were died. The majority of the deaths had exposed to secondary brain injury. More than one third of
the total patients who were alive on discharge from the ICU had physical disabilities and co-morbidities.
Conclusion & Recommendations: The components of the FOUR score, and the MGCS had different predictive abilities. The FOUR
score have higher accuracy prediction of in-hospital outcomes and the prognostic power of the FOURs was the best prognostic power
than the MGCS in the first three assessment days. Therefore, this study’s results would be bolstered by other studies that enrolled a
larger number of patients across the entire acuity spectrum, and within more hospitals.
Biography
Samah A Shalaby has completed her PhD from Alexandria University. She is a Lecturer of Critical Care and Emergency Nursing at Faculty of Nursing, Alexandria
University, Egypt. She is currently Assistant Professor at King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Saudi Arabia, and has published more than 5
papers in reputed journals.
Samah A Shalaby et al., J Nurs Care 2017, 6:3 (Suppl)