Abstract
PURPOSE: Examining the impact of scoring aids on the accuracy of assessing the Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) in a standardized trauma scenario (primary outcome). Evaluating physicians' understanding of the GCS assessment and clinical application (secondary outcome). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized trial was performed at the simulator center of a Swiss tertiary academic medical hospital. Participants included intensivists, emergency physicians, internists, and neurologists. The setting involved a trauma patient portraying a GCS of 8 (eyes 1, verbal 2, motor 5). Participants were randomized to receiving or not receiving a scoring aid. Video/audio recordings of the assessments and questionnaires were analyzed by two investigators. RESULTS: Among 109 participants, 55 received a scoring aid. Overall, 52% scored correctly (score interquartile range 7-8); 43% scored too low and 90% scored within a range of ± 1. A scoring aid increased accuracy (62% vs. 43%, p = 0.045) and participants' confidence, whilst decreasing assessment duration. Clinical experience further improved reliability. 89% found assessing a GCS of 8 most challenging, particularly with motor response evaluation (64%). 26% indicated tracheal intubation to be mandatory with a score of GCS ≤ 8. CONCLUSIONS: GCS assessment is improved by professional experience and a scoring aid, the use of which needs to be promoted in daily clinical practice. Frequent inaccuracy and misunderstanding regarding clinical applications may alter patient management and misguide treatment and prognosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry (IDISRCTN12257237) https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12257237 Retrospectively registered (last amendment 08/22/2023).