Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Neurol.
Sec. Neurotrauma
Volume 15 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1435809
This article is part of the Research Topic Differentiating and understanding the multifaceted nature of Traumatic Brain Injury using clinical and pre-clinical systems View all articles

Comparison and Combined Use of NEWS2 and GCS Scores in Predicting Mortality in Stroke and Traumatic Brain Injury A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Provisionally accepted
Huwei Hu Huwei Hu 1Xia Li Xia Li 2*Ke Shang Ke Shang 1Liqin Chen Liqin Chen 3Xin Wang Xin Wang 4
  • 1 Department of Nursing, Jinzhou Medical University, Jinzhou, China
  • 2 First Affiliated Hospital of Jinzhou Medical University, Jinzhou, Liaoning Province, China
  • 3 Shangrao People's Hospital, Shangrao, Jiangxi Province, China
  • 4 Huaiyin Hospital of Huaian City, Huai'an, Jiangsu Province, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Objective: This study aims to assess the effectiveness of the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) versus Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) in predicting hospital mortality among patients with stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI). Location: This multicenter study was conducted at two anonymized tertiary care hospitals in distinct climatic regions of China, with a combined annual emergency admission exceeding 10,000 patients. Patients: The study included 2276 adult emergency admissions diagnosed with stroke (n=1088) or TBI (n=1188) from January 2021 to December 2023, excluding those with chronic pulmonary disease, severe cardiac conditions, or a history of brain surgery Measuring and Main Outcomes: The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and the area under the curve (AUC) were utilized to analyze the predictive accuracy of NEWS2 and GCS for hospital mortality at 24, 48, and 72 hours postadmission and at discharge. Results: Out of 2276 patients (mean age 61.4, 65.6% male), 1855 survived while 421 succumbed. NEWS2 demonstrated superior predictive accuracy (AUC = 0.962) over GCS (AUC = 0.854) for overall hospital mortality. Specifically, NEWS2outperformed GCS in predicting mortality at 24 hours (0.917 vs 0.843), 48 hours (0.893 vs 0.803), and 72 hours (0.902 vs 0.763). Notably, despite a higher AUC for NEWS2 at predicting 24-hour hospital mortality, the sensitivity and specificity of GCS were considerably lower (12% and 31%, respectively) compared to NEWS2 (sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 81%).Subgroup analysis showed NEWS2 outperforming GCS in predicting inhospital mortality for TBI and stroke patients. For TBI patients (n=260), NEWS2 had an AUC of 0.960 (95% CI: 0.948-0.973) vs. GCS's AUC of 0.811 (95% CI: 0.781-0.840). For stroke patients (n=161), NEWS2 had an AUC of 0.930 (95% CI: 0.908-0.952) vs. GCS's AUC of 0.858 (95% CI: 0.823-0.892). NEWS2 showed greater sensitivity in both groups, highlighting its effectiveness in identifying high-risk neurological patients.Conclusion: NEWS2 scores are more precise and effective in predicting hospital mortality in stroke and TBI patients compared to GCS scores, although slightly less so within the first 24 hours. Combining NEWS2 with GCS and clinical findings within the initial 24 hours is recommended for a comprehensive prognosis evaluation.

    Keywords: Stroke, Brain Injuries, traumatic, National Early Warning Score (NEWS2), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS)

    Received: 30 May 2024; Accepted: 25 Jul 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Hu, Li, Shang, Chen and Wang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Xia Li, First Affiliated Hospital of Jinzhou Medical University, Jinzhou, Liaoning Province, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.