Scholarlink

Background <p>The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is a fundamental tool in emergency neurological assessment, yet its accuracy is frequently compromised by cognitive load and reliance on recall. This quality improvement project aimed to assess the accuracy, speed, and clinician confidence in GCS scoring and to evaluate the impact of a low-cost visual aid and educational intervention.</p> Methods <p>A baseline survey assessed GCS use, confidence, and reliance on visual aids among 30 emergency department (ED) staff. A subgroup of 20 staff then completed ten clinical vignettes with and without visual aids, measuring accuracy and time to completion. An educational package and standardised GCS posters were introduced, followed by three Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles assessing real-time scoring accuracy during live resuscitation room care.</p> Results <p>Of surveyed staff, 80% calculated GCS daily, though 47% did so without aids. Confidence increased from 77% without aids to 93% with aids. In vignette testing, accuracy improved from 24 to 48% (<i>p</i> = 0.18), while mean completion time decreased from 44 to 33&#xa0;s (<i>p</i> = 0.001). PDSA cycles demonstrated sustained real-time improvement in scoring accuracy (80%, 100%, 86%).</p> Conclusion <p>This intervention improved the accuracy and efficiency of GCS assessments in a high-acuity ED setting. A simple cognitive aid, embedded within a patient safety culture, can reduce error and support safer neurological assessment.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Don’t guess the GCS: a systems-based approach to safer neurological assessment in the emergency department

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月16日

查看全文
  • Enda Hession,
  • Cian Broderick,
  • James Foley

摘要

Background

The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is a fundamental tool in emergency neurological assessment, yet its accuracy is frequently compromised by cognitive load and reliance on recall. This quality improvement project aimed to assess the accuracy, speed, and clinician confidence in GCS scoring and to evaluate the impact of a low-cost visual aid and educational intervention.

Methods

A baseline survey assessed GCS use, confidence, and reliance on visual aids among 30 emergency department (ED) staff. A subgroup of 20 staff then completed ten clinical vignettes with and without visual aids, measuring accuracy and time to completion. An educational package and standardised GCS posters were introduced, followed by three Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles assessing real-time scoring accuracy during live resuscitation room care.

Results

Of surveyed staff, 80% calculated GCS daily, though 47% did so without aids. Confidence increased from 77% without aids to 93% with aids. In vignette testing, accuracy improved from 24 to 48% (p = 0.18), while mean completion time decreased from 44 to 33 s (p = 0.001). PDSA cycles demonstrated sustained real-time improvement in scoring accuracy (80%, 100%, 86%).

Conclusion

This intervention improved the accuracy and efficiency of GCS assessments in a high-acuity ED setting. A simple cognitive aid, embedded within a patient safety culture, can reduce error and support safer neurological assessment.