Article

A Study to Explore Nurses' Knowledge in Using the Glasgow Coma Scale in an Acute Care Hospital

Questions or comments about this article may be directed to Ihsan Mattar, RN BSc. (Hons), at . He is a PhD Candidate, Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore. Sok Ying Liaw, PhD RN MHSc, is an Assistant Professor, Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore. Moon Fai Chan, PhD CStat, is an Associate Professor, Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore.
The Journal of neuroscience nursing : journal of the American Association of Neuroscience Nurses 10/2013; 45(5):272-280. DOI: 10.1097/JNN.0b013e31829db970
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is a neurological instrument, which measures the "depth and duration of impaired consciousness." The appeal of the GCS lies in its applicability in a wide variety of clinical situations as well as its ease of use by a range of healthcare staff. However, the GCS is not without its weaknesses and limitations. Its ease of use opens it up to misinterpretation and misapplication. Despite the propensity for incorrect assessment, the GCS remains in use in the clinical setting and enjoys an "unwarranted and privileged position." This creates an issue to patient care as the GCS is an important instrument in communicating an accurate assessment of the patient's condition between clinical staff.
The aim of this study was to investigate nurses' knowledge in using the GCS and the demographic factors influencing knowledge of the GCS.
This is a correlational observational study conducted in one acute care hospital in Singapore. The participants were registered nurses involving in bedside nursing care. A self-administered questionnaire was provided to the participants via ward managers. The quantitative responses were collated and analyzed using SPSS 16.0.
Type of clinical discipline (i.e., neuroscience, general medicine, and neurointensive care unit; beta = 0.51, p < .001) and the length of experience in a neuroscience setting (beta = 0.22, p = .005) were significant in determining a nurses' knowledge of the GCS. Nurses in the neonatal intensive care unit scored the highest mean scores (12.7), whereas nurses from the general medicine wards scored the lowest mean scores (9.7). Nurses who worked in a neuroscience setting for 6 years or more scored higher mean scores (11.9) on the knowledge scale, whereas nurses who worked in a neuroscience setting for less than a year scored lower mean scores (10.0).
Educational interventions and guidelines in performing GCS assessment are suggested to maintain and improve knowledge in performing the GCS.

8 Followers
 · 
527 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Assessing a patient's level of consciousness is a skilled part of nursing practice. The epistemology of this activity is discussed using the four patterns of knowing identified by Carper. It is suggested that all four patterns and their interaction are necessary for a practitioner to be able to carry out this activity with the necessary reliability and accuracy that good safe practice dictates. A possible enhancement to how a practitioner gains this knowledge can be through the work of joint appointments, between education and clinical areas.
    Journal of Advanced Nursing 12/1994; 20(5):881-4. DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2648.1994.20050881.x · 1.69 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is used as an assessment tool to measure the levels of consciousness and coma in patients. This research investigated the reliability of scoring the GCS among registered nurses (RNs) working in five different sub-specialty clinical areas of critical care; general intensive care, neurosurgical intensive care, coronary care, emergency room and post anaesthetic recovery room. Seven video recordings were made of six patients (one patient was recorded twice) having their level of neurological response assessed utilising the GCS. Seventy five RNs (15 from each sub-specialty) viewed each of the GCS assessments on the videotape and rated each patient on the scoring sheet provided. Analysis was performed for all RN subjects as a single group as well as separately for each of the five groups under investigation. The ratings for the first six videos were used to test interrater reliability and the scores from videotape four and seven (same patient) were used to calculate intrarater reliability. Based on comparison with expert scores, of the 75 participants, 38 responded correctly to eye opening responses; only 26 responded correctly to the motor response ratings. However, a better accuracy was achieved in the verbal response category with 67 participants responding correctly. Education qualifications and previous neurosurgical experience were statistically significant with regard to the nurses' accuracy of GCS assessment with p values of 0.004 and 0.043 respectively. The results were consistent with previously published studies demonstrating the motor response rating is most problematic in relation to rate accuracy.
    Australian Critical Care 09/2001; 14(3):100-5. DOI:10.1016/S1036-7314(01)80026-6 · 1.27 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Following publication by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) of Early Management of Patients with a Head Injury, local practices were reviewed in a Glasgow trust. This led to both organisational and clinical changes. This article discusses how a training programme in performing neurological observations was developed to meet staff learning needs regarding head injury, and explains changes to the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) charts used in the trust.
    Nursing times 01/2005; 101(39):32-4.