Skip to content

Physicians' understanding of the Glasgow Coma Score and the effect of a scoring aid

Physicians' understanding of the Glasgow Coma Score and the effect of a scoring aid: a simulator-based randomized controlled trial

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ISRCTN
Registry ID
ISRCTN12257237
Enrollment
100
Registered
2023-06-21
Start date
2019-03-21
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-01-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Physicians' understanding of the Glasgow Coma Score Signs and Symptoms

Interventions

A cohort of volunteer medical doctors, serving as resident physicians in various medical specialties such as intensive care medicine, emergency medicine, internal medicine, and neurology. They are req

Sponsors

University Hospital of Basel
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Volunteering and consenting medical doctors working as resident physicians in different medical fields, including intensive care medicine, emergency medicine, internal medicine, and neurology

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Physicians already having participated in the same simulated clinical scenario

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Duration and accuracy of the assessment of the Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) of a simulated coma with a GCS of 8. Duration of GCS assessment will be assessed from the timepoints of first contact with the patients until stating the measured score to the instructor in mounts. GCS assessment will be rated as accurate if the GCS stated by the participants is 8. All other measured GCS will be rated as inaccurate.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Understanding of the Glasgow Coma Score among physicians regarding its assessment, interpretation and clinical application. Therefore participants will complete a prewritten questionnaire which asks the following questions: 1. Their stress level during the simulation (rated from 1 [no stress] to 10 [maximally stressed])? 2. How confident they are that the assessed GCS is accurate (rated from 0 [not confident at all] to 10 [very confident])? 3. If they use the GCS in daily clinical practice - yes or no? 4. If a GCS scoring card was felt to be missing (for participants who did not receive a scoring card) - yes or no? 5. Which of the GCS from 3 to 15 or which GCS range would be difficult to adequately assess without a scoring aid? 6. Which of the three GCS components (i.e., eye, verbal, motor response) is the most difficult to assess? 7. Which is the highest GCS an intubated patient can present 8. Does a patient with a GCS <9 have to be intubated in any case? The physicians will be finally asked to rate expected probability of a discordant GCS assessment by other physicians for the identical simulated scenarios using a probability score ranging from 0% denoting “not existing” to 100% indicating the “highest probability”.

Countries

Switzerland

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 5, 2026