Before creating the PFSS (Figure 1), consent from Dr.
The training included a 1-hour session for review of the GCS scale (both the original for assessment of children 2 to 19 years and the pediatric for assessment of children up to 23 months of age), RASS, and PCPC and overview of the PFSS.
Two different nurses independently, yet simultaneously (or within minutes of one another), assessed the PICU subjects using the PFSS, GCS, and RASS on three different occasions (between PICU admission and end of day 1, days 2-3, and day 4 or after, until PICU discharge).
Cronbach's alpha coefficients were computed to assess the internal consistencies of the PFSS and GCS.
To assess the predictive validity of the PFSS, sensitivity and specificity of the PFSS and GCS were compared with the PCPC scale for the prediction of poor outcomes and in-hospital mortality at PICU admission and discharge.
The overall reliability was excellent for both the PFSS ([[kappa].
ROC analysis curves were estimated to compare prediction of poor outcome (defined as PCPC scores of 4-6) between the PFSS and the GCS.
To compare prediction of in-hospital mortality between the PFSS and the GCS, additional ROC analysis curves were estimated.
The results of this study show that the PFSS is excellent for interrater reliabilities and for prediction of poor outcome and in-hospital mortality in a pediatric population.
However, the study failed to show that the PFSS is better than the GCS.
Although our study did not show that the PFSS is better than the GCS, it also did not indicate that it was any worse than the GCS, which has only been validated in adult head trauma patients.
However, there was still correlation between the PFSS and GCS in sedated patients.