Individualised home-schooling – at odds with the equity ambitions in the Nordic model of education?

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Frequency of fatigue and its changes in the first 6 months after traumatic brain injury : results from the CENTER-TBI study

Background Fatigue is one of the most commonly reported subjective symptoms following traumatic brain injury (TBI). The aims were to assess frequency of fatigue over the first 6 months after TBI, and examine whether fatigue changes could be predicted by demographic characteristics, injury severity and comorbidities. Methods Patients with acute TBI admitted to 65 trauma centers were enrolled in the study Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI (CENTER-TBI). Subjective fatigue was measured by single item on the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ), administered at baseline, three and 6 months postinjury. Patients were categorized by clinical care pathway: admitted to an emergency room (ER), a ward (ADM) or an intensive care unit (ICU). Injury severity, preinjury somatic- and psychiatric conditions, depressive and sleep problems were registered at baseline. For prediction of fatigue changes, descriptive statistics and mixed effect logistic regression analysis are reported. Results Fatigue was experienced by 47% of patients at baseline, 48% at 3 months and 46% at 6 months. Patients admitted to ICU had a higher probability of experiencing fatigue than those in ER and ADM strata. Females and individuals with lower age, higher education, more severe intracranial injury, preinjury somatic and psychiatric conditions, sleep disturbance and feeling depressed postinjury had a higher probability of fatigue. Conclusion A high and stable frequency of fatigue was found during the first 6 months after TBI. Specific socio-demographic factors, comorbidities and injury severity characteristics were predictors of fatigue in this study.Peer reviewe

Does an early onset and continuous chain of rehabilitation improve the long-term functional outcome of patients with severe traumatic brain injury?

Published version of an article published in the journal: Journal of Neurotrauma. Also available from the publisher at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/neu.2011.1811There are currently no international guidelines regarding treatment in the early rehabilitation phase for persons with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), and only a few studies have investigated the effect of integrating rehabilitation into acute TBI care. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether a continuous chain of rehabilitation that begins with the acute phase could improve the functional outcome of severe TBI patients, compared to a broken chain of rehabilitation that starts in the sub-acute phase of TBI. A total of 61 surviving patients with severe TBI were included in a quasi-experimental study conducted at the Level I trauma center in Eastern Norway. In the study, 31 patients were in the early rehabilitation group (Group A) and 30 patients were in the delayed rehabilitation group (Group B). The functional outcomes were assessed 12 months post-injury with the Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) and the Disability Rating Scale (DRS). A favorable outcome (GOSE 6-8) occurred in 71 % of the patients from Group A versus 37 % in Group B (p=0.007). The DRS score was significantly better in Group A (p=0.03). The ordinal logistic regression analysis was used to quantify the relationship between the type of rehabilitation chain and the GOSE. A better GOSE outcome was found in patients from Group A (unadjusted OR 3.25 and adjusted OR 2.78, respectively). These results support the hypothesis that better functional outcome occurs in patients who receive early onset and a continuous chain of rehabilitation

Unmet Rehabilitation Needs after Traumatic Brain Injury across Europe: Results from the CENTER-TBI Study

This study aims to assess rehabilitation needs and provision of rehabilitation services for individuals with moderate-to-severe disability and investigate factors influencing the probability of receiving rehabilitation within six months after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Overall, the analyses included 1206 individuals enrolled in the CENTER-TBI study with severe-to-moderate disability. Impairments in five outcome domains (daily life activities, physical, cognition, speech/language, and psychological) and the use of respective rehabilitation services (occupational therapy, physiotherapy, cognitive and speech therapies, and psychological counselling) were recorded. Sociodemographic and injury-related factors were used to investigate the probability of receiving rehabilitation. Physiotherapy was the most frequently provided rehabilitation service, followed by speech and occupational therapy. Psychological counselling was the least frequently accessed service. The probability of receiving a rehabilitative intervention increased for individuals with greater brain injury severity (odds ratio (OR) 1.75, CI 95%: 1.27-2.42), physical (OR 1.92, CI 95%: 1.21-3.05) and cognitive problems (OR 4.00, CI 95%: 2.34-6.83) but decreased for individuals reporting psychological problems (OR 0.57, CI 95%: 1.21-3.05). The study results emphasize the need for more extensive prescription of rehabilitation services for individuals with disability. Moreover, targeted rehabilitation programs, which aim to improve outcomes, should specifically involve psychological services to meet the needs of individuals recovering from TBI

Effects of acute substance use and pre-injury substance abuse on traumatic brain injury severity in adults admitted to a trauma centre

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aims of this study were to describe the occurrence of substance use at the time of injury and pre-injury substance abuse in patients with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Effects of acute substance use and pre-injury substance abuse on TBI severity were also investigated.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A prospective study of 111 patients, aged 16-55 years, injured from May 2005 to May 2007 and hospitalised at the Trauma Referral Centre in Eastern Norway with acute TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale 3-12). Based on structural brain damages shown on a computed tomography (CT) scan, TBI severity was defined by modified Marshall classification as less severe (score <3) and more severe (score ≥3). Clinical definition of substance use (alcohol and/or other psychoactive substances) was applied when hospital admission records reflected blood alcohol levels or a positive drug screen, or when a physician verified influence by examining the patient. Pre-injury substance abuse (alcohol and drug problems) was screened by using the CAGE questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Forty-seven percent of patients were positive for substance use on admission to hospital. Significant pre-injury substance abuse was reported by 26% of patients. Substance use at the time of injury was more frequent in the less severe group (p = 0.01). The frequency of pre-injury substance abuse was higher in the more severe group (30% vs. 23%). In a logistic regression model, acute substance use at time of injury tended to decrease the probability of more severe intracranial injury, but the effect was not statistically significant after adjusting for age, gender, education, cause of injury and substance abuse, OR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.11-1.35, p = 0.14. Patients with positive screens for pre-injury substance abuse (CAGE ≥2) were more likely to have more severe TBI in the adjusted regression analyses, OR = 4.05; 95% CI 1.10-15.64, p = 0.04.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Acute <b>s</b>ubstance use was more frequent in patients with less severe TBI caused by low-energy events such as falls, violence and sport accidents. Pre-injury substance abuse increased the probability of more severe TBI caused by high-energy trauma such as motor vehicle accidents and falls from higher levels. Preventive efforts to reduce substance consumption and abuse in at-risk populations are needed.</p

Quality indicators for patients with traumatic brain injury in European intensive care units

Background: The aim of this study is to validate a previously published consensus-based quality indicator set for the management of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) at intensive care units (ICUs) in Europe and to study its potential for quality measur

Changing care pathways and between-center practice variations in intensive care for traumatic brain injury across Europe

Purpose: To describe ICU stay, selected management aspects, and outcome of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) in Europe, and to quantify variation across centers. Methods: This is a prospective observational multicenter study conducted across 18 countries in Europe and Israel. Admission characteristics, clinical data, and outcome were described at patient- and center levels. Between-center variation in the total ICU population was quantified with the median odds ratio (MOR), with correction for case-mix and random variation between centers. Results: A total of 2138 patients were admitted to the ICU, with median age of 49 years; 36% of which were mild TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale; GCS 13–15). Within, 72 h 636 (30%) were discharged and 128 (6%) died. Early deaths and long-stay patients (> 72 h) had more severe injuries based on the GCS and neuroimaging characteristics, compared with short-stay patients. Long-stay patients received more monitoring and were treated at higher intensity, and experienced worse 6-month outcome compared to short-stay patients. Between-center variations were prominent in the proportion of short-stay patients (MOR = 2.3, p < 0.001), use of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring (MOR = 2.5, p < 0.001) and aggressive treatme

Machine learning algorithms performed no better than regression models for prognostication in traumatic brain injury

Objective: We aimed to explore the added value of common machine learning (ML) algorithms for prediction of outcome for moderate and severe traumatic brain injury. Study Design and Setting: We performed logistic regression (LR), lasso regression, and ridge regression with key baseline predictors in the IMPACT-II database (15 studies, n = 11,022). ML algorithms included support vector machines, random forests, gradient boosting machines, and artificial neural networks and were trained using the same predictors. To assess generalizability of predictions, we performed internal, internal-external, and external validation on the recent CENTER-TBI study (patients with Glasgow Coma Scale <13, n = 1,554). Both calibration (calibration slope/intercept) and discrimination (area under the curve) was quantified. Results: In the IMPACT-II database, 3,332/11,022 (30%) died and 5,233(48%) had unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale less than 4). In the CENTER-TBI study, 348/1,554(29%) died and 651(54%) had unfavorable outcome. Discrimination and calibration varied widely between the studies and less so between the studied algorithms. The mean area under the curve was 0.82 for mortality and 0.77 for unfavorable outcomes in the CENTER-TBI study. Conclusion: ML algorithms may not outperform traditional regression approaches in a low-dimensional setting for outcome prediction after moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. Similar to regression-based prediction models, ML algorithms should be rigorously validated to ensure applicability to new populations

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