Hunt and Hess Grading Scale
Hunt and Hess Grading Scale for Subarachnoid Hemorrhage · Also known as: Hunt-Hess Grade
The Hunt and Hess Scale is the most widely used clinical grading system for assessing severity and prognosis in subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) caused by ruptured intracranial aneurysm. Developed by neurosurgeons William Hunt and Robert Hess in 1968, the five-point ordinal scale measures level of consciousness and presence of focal neurological deficits. Hunt-Hess grade at admission is the single strongest predictor of 30-day mortality and functional outcome and guides urgency of neurosurgical intervention.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
When to use it
Mandatory assessment for all patients with confirmed subarachnoid hemorrhage at admission and repeated if clinical deterioration occurs (rebleed suspected, vasospasm development). Hunt-Hess grade guides: (1) neurosurgical decision-making (when to offer/recommend surgery, timing of intervention); (2) family counseling regarding prognosis and outcome expectations; (3) resource allocation (ICU level of care, rehabilitation facility vs hospice); (4) research stratification in clinical trials comparing SAH management strategies. Not used for initial differential diagnosis (CT/LP confirms SAH diagnosis); grade determined after SAH confirmed. Widely accepted in North America, Europe, and internationally as standard SAH severity measure.
Strengths & limitations
- Simple five-point ordinal scale requiring only clinical bedside examination; no equipment or laboratory tests required.
- Developed in 1968 and validated across decades with extensive outcome data; 30-day mortality and functional outcome thresholds well-established across patient populations and geographic regions.
- Strong prognostic validity: Hunt-Hess grade at admission single strongest predictor of mortality and outcome (better discriminant than CT blood volume or WFNS scale in some cohorts).
- Actionable for clinical decision-making: distinguishes good-grade patients (elective surgery) from poor-grade patients (limited prognosis, discuss with family) guides urgency of intervention.
- Global adoption enables international comparison of SAH outcomes and multicenter trial enrollment with standardized severity stratification.
- Incorporates both consciousness level and focal neurological deficit, capturing comprehensive acute severity.
- Ordinal scale without interval properties; difference between Grade I and II may not represent equivalent severity difference as Grade III and IV; non-linear relationship to outcome severity.
- Subjective assessment of 'drowsy' vs 'stuporous' vs 'comatose' subject to inter-rater variability; standardized coma scale (Glasgow Coma Scale) may be more objective but not standard in SAH literature.
- Does not incorporate imaging severity (CT blood amount, intraventricular hemorrhage, cerebral edema, aneurysm size/location) known to independently predict outcome; imaging alone may better predict prognosis in some cases.
- Limited to clinical assessment at single time point; does not track early deterioration or improvement during first 48 hours (up to 15% rebleed rate within 24 hours); serial assessments more valuable than single admission grade.
- Poor-grade patients (IV-V) with grim prognosis present ethical dilemma: scale provides mortality prediction but does not guide family discussion regarding code status, goals of care, or ethics of aggressive intervention in futile cases.
- Subjective components (focal deficit presence/severity) create potential for grade assignment bias; no standardized detailed neurological scoring system within Hunt-Hess (unlike NIHSS in stroke).
Frequently asked
What is the difference between Hunt-Hess and WFNS grading scale?
Both grade SAH severity but use different criteria. Hunt-Hess uses consciousness (alert/drowsy/comatose) and presence of focal deficit in a 5-point scale. WFNS uses Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and presence of motor deficit in its criteria, yielding a similar 5-point grade. WFNS is more objective (GCS documented) but more complex. Hunt-Hess is simpler and historically more widely used. Studies show modest differences in prognostic accuracy (r=0.7-0.8 between scales); outcomes similar. Use whichever is institutional standard; cite scale used in publications.
Can Hunt-Hess grade be assigned in sedated patients?
Not reliably. If patient is sedated for mechanical ventilation, Hunt-Hess grade cannot be accurately assigned (consciousness level masked by sedation). Document pre-sedation grade if available; alternatively, note 'Grade unknown due to sedation' and establish plan to re-assess when sedation lightened. Some centers use WFNS scale (GCS component valid even with sedation by protocol reversal). Do not fabricate grade in sedated patients; assessment validity is compromised.
Does Hunt-Hess grade predict if surgery should be offered?
Hunt-Hess grade is prognostic (predicts outcome) but does not determine surgical decision automatically. Grade I-II patients universally offered surgical aneurysm repair due to excellent expected outcomes. Grade III: surgery still typically offered with informed consent. Grade IV-V: neurosurgeon and family discuss candidacy—some centers offer emergent surgery as life-saving attempt; others recommend comfort care given dismal prognosis. The decision integrates Hunt-Hess grade with patient age, premorbid function, family wishes, and institutional resources. Grade informs but does not dictate treatment.
If patient improves clinically, does Hunt-Hess grade downgrade?
In published outcome studies, Hunt-Hess grade typically refers to grade at admission/initial presentation. If patient improves (e.g., Grade III on admission becomes Grade II after vasospasm treatment), document the improvement but the original admission grade is reported for outcome correlation. Some centers reassess grade at 48-72 hours or after intervention to document interval change. Always specify timing of grade assessment when reporting outcome.
What is the 'moribund' appearance mentioned in Grade V?
Moribund appearance indicates imminently terminal state: deep coma with fixed dilated pupils, decerebrate posturing, absent brainstem reflexes, or signs of severe brainstem dysfunction. Patient is expected to die despite maximal intervention. Used clinically to communicate prognosis to neurosurgical team and families that Grade V carries dismal outlook. However, definition somewhat subjective; if in doubt (patient comatose but pupils reactive, brainstem reflexes intact), clarify with senior neurosurgeon for Grade IV vs V determination.
Sources
- Hunt, W. E., Hess, R. M. (1968). Surgical risk as related to time of intervention in the repair of intracranial aneurysms. Journal of Neurosurgery, 28(1), 14-20. DOI: 10.3171/jns.1968.28.1.0014 ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Hunt and Hess Grading Scale for Subarachnoid Hemorrhage. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/neurology/hunt-hess-scale
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- EDSSNeurology↔ compare
- MDS-UPDRSNeurology↔ compare
- NIHSSNeurology↔ compare
- WFNS ScaleNeurology↔ compare