<![CDATA[Background: Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Score (FOUR score) are instruments to determine the level of patient consciousness. These instruments require good sensitivity and specificity, so that they can be used quickly and easily. This study aimed to determine the validity and reliability of GCS and FOUR score instruments in determining adult patient outcome.Subjects and Method: This study was a systematic review study. The search for the articles involved the client population treated in the ICU, Emergency Installation and neurology room, patients who did not receive sedation or neuro blockers, were observed by health workers. The outcomes were in the form of death of patients in the hospital, mRS, Glasgow outcome score, and APACHE II. This study were carried out using EBSCO, Sciencedirect, Pubmed, and Google Scholar, restricted articles from 2007-2017, and observational study. The number of articles that was in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this study was 9 articles. All articles found were used as sample.Results: The average sensitivity and specificity values of the GCS instrument and FOUR Score were close to 1 or 100%. From the 8 articles found, all got sensitivity and specificity values by >50%.Conclusion: The FOUR instrument score can be used as a substitute for GCS to assess the level of patient consciousness with patient outcomes (death) in ICU.Keywords: glasgow coma scale, full outline of unresponsiveness score, outcomeCorrespondence: Ika Silvitasari. School of Health Sciences Aisyiyah, Surakarta, Central Java. Jl. Ki Hajar Dewantara 10, Surakarta 57126, Central Java. Email: mouse_02april@yahoo.com.Indonesian Journal of Medicine (2019), 4(4): 339-345https://doi.org/10.26911/theijmed.2019.04.04.06]]>
Copyrights © 2019
