Impaired ConsciousnessNCT01537913
FOUR Score in Children With Non-traumatic Impairment of Consciousness
An observational study of Impaired Consciousness, run by All India Institute of Medical Sciences.
Trial summary
Hypothesis: FOUR score is a better predictor of outcome (in hospital mortality and functional outcome at discharge) than GCS in children 5- 18 years age admitted in pediatric ward/ ICU with non-traumatic impaired consciousness. The assessment of comatose patients is an important part of critical care. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 5 to 18 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Impaired Consciousness
- How many people
- 70 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Jun 2009to Jun 2010
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 5 to 18 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult
Study population: Children aged 5-18 years, admitted in PICU or pediatric ward with impaired consciousness of less than 7 days duration
Who may be able to join
- Children aged 5-18 years
- Meeting the definition of impaired consciousness52
- Admitted in PICU or pediatric ward
- Duration < 7 days
Who cannot join
- Traumatic brain injury
- Patients already on sedatives or neuromuscular blockade
- Children with cerebral palsy, severe mental retardation, degenerative brain disease.
- Known vision/Hearing impairment
- Ongoing seizures or seizure within last 1 hour
About this study
Official title: Comparison of the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) Score With Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) in Children With Non-traumatic Impairment of Consciousness.
Hypothesis: FOUR score is a better predictor of outcome (in hospital mortality and functional outcome at discharge) than GCS in children 5- 18 years age admitted in pediatric ward/ ICU with non-traumatic impaired consciousness.
The assessment of comatose patients is an important part of critical care. The assessment of the level of coma relies on clinical scores. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS),remains the most commonly used scoring system for altered state of consciousness. Despite its widespread use, a number of limitations have been identified with GCS like inability to assess verbal score in intubated patients and non-inclusion of vital brainstem functions. The FOUR (Full Outline of UnResponsiveness) score, a coma scale consisting of four components (eye response, motor response, brainstem reflexes, and respiration pattern) was recently proposed by investigators from the Mayo Clinic.keeping in view the limitations of GCS, this study was planned to compare the new FOUR score with GCS as a predictor of mortality and poor functional outcome at hospital discharge.
Read the detailed description
This prospective observational study was carried out from May 2009 to June 2010 in the Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. This study was approved by institutional ethics committee.
Participants We enrolled children aged 5-18 years who presented with impaired consciousness of less than 7 days duration and were admitted in the pediatric ward or pediatric ICU. Children with traumatic brain injury, known vision/hearing impairment, cerebral palsy, mental retardation, degenerative brain disease; those already on sedatives or neuromuscular blockade and with ongoing seizure or seizure within last 1 hour were excluded from the study.
Sample Size From the previous studies, it is known that ROC of GCS in children for prediction of mortality is 0.7.15 Assuming FOUR score to be better predictor of outcome (area under curve for FOUR score assumed to be 0.8), the sample size calculation was done using MedcalcR version 9.2.0.1. The correlation between both the scores and outcome was assumed to be 0.7. Keeping α-level as 0.05 and β-level as 0.20, the sample size was calculated to be 70.
Assessment Procedure The investigator (GK) was trained with the standardized video examples included in a DVD prepared by the developers of the FOUR score (Wijdicks et al10). After training, the investigator demonstrated the score on 2 patients while being supervised by Pediatric Neurologist. There was periodic training of the investigator every month by reviewing the case examples in DVD and rechecking the score periodically.
Written informed consent was obtained from the parents/ guardians for all patients. All the observations (required for the FOUR score and GCS) and investigations (required for PIM2) are done routinely in the children admitted in Pediatric ward/PICU. No additional investigations or interventions were done primarily for the study. Standardized care based on current guidelines was provided to all the patients.
Rater (GK) was given one page hand-out with written instructions describing both the FOUR score and the GCS. The GCS and the FOUR score applied by the rater within two hours of admission and before starting sedatives or neuromuscular blockade. The rater was primary investigator in all the patients. The sequence of application of the scores was randomized using block randomization with block size of 10 patients.
Severity of illness was assessed by PIM2 score16. For PIM2, the values of various variables at time of admission to Pediatric ward/PICU were recorded. PIM 2-based mortality index was evaluated based on the regression equation as published in the literature.The children with impaired consciousness and reduced mental state were classified as obtunded, stuporous or comatose based on classification given by Taylor et al.17 The etiology was determined based on review of the clinical, laboratory and imaging data by the Pediatric Neurologist.
The patient was followed till discharge/ in-hospital mortality. The functional outcome of the patients was assessed by the Pediatric Overall Performance Category (POPC)18 at the time of PICU discharge or 1 month following admission whichever was earlier. This scale ranges in value from 1 to 6 with a value of 1 indicating normal functioning and a value of 6 indicating brain death. Children were considered to have poor outcomes if they scored 3-6 on the POPC scale, consistent with moderate to severe disability to vegetative state, coma or brain death. The POPC score was obtained through direct questions about the child's ability to perform age-appropriate activities, use of rehabilitative services, and physical disabilities.
- Conditions
- Impaired Consciousness
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
In-hospital Mortality
Measured: From admission till discharge/ in-hospital mortality
Secondary outcomes (1)
Pediatric Overall Performance Category scale (POPC) scale
Measured: 1 month or discharge whichever is earlier
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Feb 2012 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2009
- Study completionJun 2010
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Impaired ConsciousnessStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case only
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 70 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- All India Institute of Medical Sciences
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Gurpreet Kochar, All India Institute of Medical Sciences
- Investigators
- Gurpreet S Kochar, DM, Principal investigator, All India Institute of Medical SciencesSheffali Gulati, Study director, All India Institute of Medical SciencesRakesh Lodha, Study chair, All India Institute of Medical Sciences
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01537913
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- FOUR_Score
- Status last verified
- Feb 2012
- First submitted
- 18 Feb 2012
- Last updated
- 23 Feb 2012
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Feb 2012. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison of the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) Score With Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) in Children With Non-traumatic Impairment of Consciousness.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01537913
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- FOUR_Score
- Conditions
- Impaired Consciousness
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 70 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- All India Institute of Medical SciencesUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jun 2009
- Study completion
- Jun 2010 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Feb 2012 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Hypothesis: FOUR score is a better predictor of outcome (in hospital mortality and functional outcome at discharge) than GCS in children 5- 18 years age admitted in pediatric ward/ ICU with non-traumatic impaired consciousness.
The assessment of comatose patients is an important part of critical care. The assessment of the level of coma relies on clinical scores. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS),remains the most commonly used scoring system for altered state of consciousness. Despite its widespread use, a number of limitations have been identified with GCS like inability to assess verbal score in intubated patients and non-inclusion of vital brainstem functions. The FOUR (Full Outline of UnResponsiveness) score, a coma scale consisting of four components (eye response, motor response, brainstem reflexes, and respiration pattern) was recently proposed by investigators from the Mayo Clinic.keeping in view the limitations of GCS, this study was planned to compare the new FOUR score with GCS as a predictor of mortality and poor functional outcome at hospital discharge.
Detailed description
This prospective observational study was carried out from May 2009 to June 2010 in the Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. This study was approved by institutional ethics committee.
Participants We enrolled children aged 5-18 years who presented with impaired consciousness of less than 7 days duration and were admitted in the pediatric ward or pediatric ICU. Children with traumatic brain injury, known vision/hearing impairment, cerebral palsy, mental retardation, degenerative brain disease; those already on sedatives or neuromuscular blockade and with ongoing seizure or seizure within last 1 hour were excluded from the study.
Sample Size From the previous studies, it is known that ROC of GCS in children for prediction of mortality is 0.7.15 Assuming FOUR score to be better predictor of outcome (area under curve for FOUR score assumed to be 0.8), the sample size calculation was done using MedcalcR version 9.2.0.1. The correlation between both the scores and outcome was assumed to be 0.7. Keeping α-level as 0.05 and β-level as 0.20, the sample size was calculated to be 70.
Assessment Procedure The investigator (GK) was trained with the standardized video examples included in a DVD prepared by the developers of the FOUR score (Wijdicks et al10). After training, the investigator demonstrated the score on 2 patients while being supervised by Pediatric Neurologist. There was periodic training of the investigator every month by reviewing the case examples in DVD and rechecking the score periodically.
Written informed consent was obtained from the parents/ guardians for all patients. All the observations (required for the FOUR score and GCS) and investigations (required for PIM2) are done routinely in the children admitted in Pediatric ward/PICU. No additional investigations or interventions were done primarily for the study. Standardized care based on current guidelines was provided to all the patients.
Rater (GK) was given one page hand-out with written instructions describing both the FOUR score and the GCS. The GCS and the FOUR score applied by the rater within two hours of admission and before starting sedatives or neuromuscular blockade. The rater was primary investigator in all the patients. The sequence of application of the scores was randomized using block randomization with block size of 10 patients.
Severity of illness was assessed by PIM2 score16. For PIM2, the values of various variables at time of admission to Pediatric ward/PICU were recorded. PIM 2-based mortality index was evaluated based on the regression equation as published in the literature.The children with impaired consciousness and reduced mental state were classified as obtunded, stuporous or comatose based on classification given by Taylor et al.17 The etiology was determined based on review of the clinical, laboratory and imaging data by the Pediatric Neurologist.
The patient was followed till discharge/ in-hospital mortality. The functional outcome of the patients was assessed by the Pediatric Overall Performance Category (POPC)18 at the time of PICU discharge or 1 month following admission whichever was earlier. This scale ranges in value from 1 to 6 with a value of 1 indicating normal functioning and a value of 6 indicating brain death. Children were considered to have poor outcomes if they scored 3-6 on the POPC scale, consistent with moderate to severe disability to vegetative state, coma or brain death. The POPC score was obtained through direct questions about the child's ability to perform age-appropriate activities, use of rehabilitative services, and physical disabilities.
Study design
- Observational model
- Case only
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 5 to 18 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
- Study population
- Children aged 5-18 years, admitted in PICU or pediatric ward with impaired consciousness of less than 7 days duration
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Children aged 5-18 years
- Meeting the definition of impaired consciousness52
- Admitted in PICU or pediatric ward
- Duration < 7 days
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Traumatic brain injury
- Patients already on sedatives or neuromuscular blockade
- Children with cerebral palsy, severe mental retardation, degenerative brain disease.
- Known vision/Hearing impairment
- Ongoing seizures or seizure within last 1 hour
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
In-hospital Mortality
Time frame: From admission till discharge/ in-hospital mortality
1 secondary outcome
Pediatric Overall Performance Category scale (POPC) scale
Time frame: 1 month or discharge whichever is earlier
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Feb 2012.
Related trials for Impaired Consciousness
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
Bovis Calculus Stativus Treat Acute Cerebral Ischemic Stroke With Impaired Consciousness
Acute Ischemic Stroke AIS, Impaired Consciousness
RecruitingObservational study
Neuroimmunology Registry and Biobank
Encephalopathy, Psychosis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Gurpreet S Kochar, DM principal investigator
All India Institute of Medical Sciences
Sheffali Gulati study director
All India Institute of Medical Sciences
Rakesh Lodha study chair
All India Institute of Medical Sciences
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Impaired Consciousness, run by All India Institute of Medical Sciences.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Feb 2012. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
In-hospital Mortality (time frame: From admission till discharge/ in-hospital mortality). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Feb 2012.