Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury: Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study.

INTRODUCTION: The strength of evidence underpinning care and treatment recommendations in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is low. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been proposed as a framework to provide evidence for optimal care for TBI patients. The first step in CER is to map the existing variation. The aim of current study is to quantify variation in general structural and process characteristics among centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. METHODS: We designed a set of 11 provider profiling questionnaires with 321 questions about various aspects of TBI care, chosen based on literature and expert opinion. After pilot testing, questionnaires were disseminated to 71 centers from 20 countries participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Reliability of questionnaires was estimated by calculating a concordance rate among 5% duplicate questions. RESULTS: All 71 centers completed the questionnaires. Median concordance rate among duplicate questions was 0.85. The majority of centers were academic hospitals (n = 65, 92%), designated as a level I trauma center (n = 48, 68%) and situated in an urban location (n = 70, 99%). The availability of facilities for neuro-trauma care varied across centers; e.g. 40 (57%) had a dedicated neuro-intensive care unit (ICU), 36 (51%) had an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and the organization of the ICU was closed in 64% (n = 45) of the centers. In addition, we found wide variation in processes of care, such as the ICU admission policy and intracranial pressure monitoring policy among centers. CONCLUSION: Even among high-volume, specialized neurotrauma centers there is substantial variation in structures and processes of TBI care. This variation provides an opportunity to study effectiveness of specific aspects of TBI care and to identify best practices with CER approaches

Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury

Background: Neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging, with only low-quality evidence. We aimed to explore differences in neurosurgical strategies for TBI across Europe. Methods: A survey was sent to 68 centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. The questionnaire contained 21 questions, including the decision when to operate (or not) on traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and intracerebral hematoma (ICH), and when to perform a decompressive craniectomy (DC) in raised intracranial pressure (ICP). Results: The survey was completed by 68 centers (100%). On average, 10 neurosurgeons work in each trauma center. In all centers, a neurosurgeon was available within 30 min. Forty percent of responders reported a thickness or volume threshold for evacuation of an ASDH. Most responders (78%) decide on a primary DC in evacuating an ASDH during the operation, when swelling is present. For ICH, 3% would perform an evacuation directly to prevent secondary deterioration and 66% only in case of clinical deterioration. Most respondents (91%) reported to consider a DC for refractory high ICP. The reported cut-off ICP for DC in refractory high ICP, however, differed: 60% uses 25 mmHg, 18% 30 mmHg, and 17% 20 mmHg. Treatment strategies varied substantially between regions, specifically for the threshold for ASDH surgery and DC for refractory raised ICP. Also within center variation was present: 31% reported variation within the hospital for inserting an ICP monitor and 43% for evacuating mass lesions. Conclusion: Despite a homogeneous organization, considerable practice variation exists of neurosurgical strategies for TBI in Europe. These results provide an incentive for comparative effectiveness research to determine elements of effective neurosurgical care

Early prognostication after cardiac arrest: Are we getting closer?

Item does not contain fulltex

Is alpha-stat or pH-stat the best strategy during hypothermia after cardiac arrest?*

Item does not contain fulltex

Bradykinin-receptor antagonist icatibant: possible treatment for ACE inhibitor-related angio-oedema

Contains fulltext : 110425.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)No abstract available

Continuous EEG Monitoring for Early Detection of Delayed Cerebral Ischemia in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION: Early identification of delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is a major challenge. The aim of this study was to investigate whether quantitative EEG (qEEG) features can detect DCI prior to clinical or radiographic findings. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed in aSAH patients in whom continuous EEG (cEEG) was recorded. We studied 12 qEEG features. We compared the time point at which qEEG changed with the time point that clinical deterioration occurred or new ischemia was noted on CT scan. Results : Twenty aSAH patients were included of whom 11 developed DCI. The alpha/delta ratio (ADR) was the most promising feature that showed a significant difference in change over time in the DCI group (median -62 % with IQR -87 to -39 %) compared to the control group (median +27 % with IQR -32 to +104 %, p = 0.013). Based on the ROC curve, a threshold was chosen for a combined measure of ADR and alpha variability (AUC: 91.7, 95 % CI 74.2-100). The median time that elapsed between change of qEEG and clinical DCI diagnosis was seven hours (IQR -11-25). Delay between qEEG and CT scan changes was 44 h (median, IQR 14-117). CONCLUSION: In this study, ADR and alpha variability could detect DCI development before ischemic changes on CT scan was apparent and before clinical deterioration was noted. Implementation of cEEG in aSAH patients can probably improve early detection of DCI

Intensive care staff, the donation request and relatives' satisfaction with the decision: a focus group study

Contains fulltext : 138323.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Effectiveness of the donation request is generally measured by consent rates, rather than by relatives' satisfaction with their decision. Our aim was to elicit Dutch ICU staffs' views and experiences with the donation request, to investigate their awareness of (dis)satisfaction with donation decisions by relatives, specifically in the case of refusal, and to collect advice that may leave more relatives satisfied with their decision. METHODS: Five focus groups with a total of 32 participants (IC physicians, IC nurses and transplant coordinators) from five university hospitals in the Netherlands. Transcripts were examined using standard qualitative methods. RESULTS: Four themes (donation request perceived by ICU staff from the perspective of relatives; donation request perceived by ICU staff from their own perspective; aftercare; donation in society) divided into 14 categories were identified. According to ICU staff, relatives mentioned their own values more frequently than values of the potential donor as important for the decision. ICU staff observed this imbalance, but reacted empathically to the relatives' point of view. ICU staff rarely suggested reconsideration of refusal and did not ask relatives for arguments. ICU staff did not always feel comfortable with a request in the delicate context of brain death. Sometimes the interests of patient, relatives and those on the waiting list were irreconcilable. ICU staff were mostly unaware of relatives' regret following their decisions. Aftercare did not provide this type of information. Donation request by IC physicians was influenced by the way organ donation has been regulated in society (law, donor register, education, media). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings lead to the hypothesis that giving relatives more time and inviting them to reconsider their initial refusal will lead to a more stable decision and possibly more consent

Prognostication in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest: An advisory statement from the European Resuscitation Council and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine

Contains fulltext : 138933.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)OBJECTIVES: To review and update the evidence on predictors of poor outcome (death, persistent vegetative state or severe neurological disability) in adult comatose survivors of cardiac arrest, either treated or not treated with controlled temperature, to identify knowledge gaps and to suggest a reliable prognostication strategy. METHODS: GRADE-based systematic review followed by expert consensus achieved using Web-based Delphi methodology, conference calls and face-to-face meetings. Predictors based on clinical examination, electrophysiology, biomarkers and imaging were included. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from a total of 73 studies was reviewed. The quality of evidence was low or very low for almost all studies. In patients who are comatose with absent or extensor motor response at >/=72 h from arrest, either treated or not treated with controlled temperature, bilateral absence of either pupillary and corneal reflexes or N20 wave of short-latency somatosensory evoked potentials were identified as the most robust predictors. Early status myoclonus, elevated values of neuron-specific enolase at 48-72 h from arrest, unreactive malignant EEG patterns after rewarming, and presence of diffuse signs of postanoxic injury on either computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging were identified as useful but less robust predictors. Prolonged observation and repeated assessments should be considered when results of initial assessment are inconclusive. Although no specific combination of predictors is sufficiently supported by available evidence, a multimodal prognostication approach is recommended in all patients