Neurobehavioral Function in Adults Recovering Consciousness after Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Scoping Review

This scoping review aims to report the findings of current literature examining the assessment of neurobehavioral function and recovery along the continuum of disorders of consciousness (DOC) from coma to full consciousness. •This study is designed to capture the range of constructs researchers have used to measure NBF during recovery of consciousness. •The research question for this review was: “What constructs are most frequently used to assess neurobehavioral function in adults recovering consciousness after severe TBI?

Prescribing Multiple Neurostimulants during Rehabilitation for Severe Brain Injury.

Background. Despite a lack of clear evidence, multiple neurostimulants are commonly provided after severe brain injury (BI). The purpose of this study is to determine if the number of neurostimulants received during rehabilitation was associated with recovery of full consciousness or improved neurobehavioral function after severe BI. Method. Data from 115 participants were extracted from a neurobehavioral observational study database for this exploratory, retrospective analysis. Univariate optimal data analysis was conducted to determine if the number of neurostimulants influenced classification of four outcomes: recovery of full consciousness during rehabilitation, recovery of full consciousness within one year of injury, and meaningful neurobehavioral improvement during rehabilitation defined as either at least a 4.7 unit (minimal detectable change) or 2.58 unit (minimal clinically important difference) gain on the Disorders of Consciousness Scale-25 (DOCS-25). Results. Number of neurostimulants was not significantly (P \u3e 0.05) associated with recovery of full consciousness during rehabilitation, within one year of injury, or meaningful neurobehavioral improvement using the DOCS-25. Conclusions. Receiving multiple neurostimulants during rehabilitation may not influence recovery of full consciousness or meaningful neurobehavioral improvement. Given costs associated with additional medication, future research is needed to guide physicians about the merits of prescribing multiple neurostimulants during rehabilitation after severe BI

Using case-based reasoning in a learning system:a prototype of a pedagogical nurse tool for evidence-based diabetic foot ulcer care

BACKGROUND: Currently, evidence-based learning systems to increase knowledge and evidence level of wound care are unavailable to wound care nurses in Denmark, which means that they need to learn about diabetic foot ulcers from experience and peer-to-peer training, or by asking experienced colleagues. Interactive evidence-based learning systems built on case-based reasoning (CBR) have the potential to increase wound care nurses’ diabetic foot ulcer knowledge and evidence levels. METHOD: A prototype of a CBR-interactive, evidence-based algorithm-operated learning system calculates a dissimilarity score (DS) that gives a quantitative measure of similarity between a new case and cases stored in a case base in relation to six variables: necrosis, wound size, granulation, fibrin, dry skin, and age. Based on the DS, cases are selected by matching the six variables with the best predictive power and by weighing the impact of each variable according to its contribution to the prediction. The cases are ranked, and the six cases with the lowest DS are visualized in the system. RESULTS: Conventional education, that is, evidence-based learning material such as books and lectures, may be less motivating and pedagogical than peer-to-peer training, which is, however, often less evidence-based. The CBR interactive learning systems presented in this study may bridge the two approaches. Showing wound care nurses how individual variables affect outcomes may help them achieve greater insights into pathophysiological processes. CONCLUSION: A prototype of a CBR-interactive, evidence-based learning system that is centered on diabetic foot ulcers and related treatments bridges the gap between traditional evidence-based learning and more motivating and interactive learning approaches

Prescribing Multiple Neurostimulants during Rehabilitation for Severe Brain Injury

Background. Despite a lack of clear evidence, multiple neurostimulants are commonly provided after severe brain injury (BI). The purpose of this study is to determine if the number of neurostimulants received during rehabilitation was associated with recovery of full consciousness or improved neurobehavioral function after severe BI. Method. Data from 115 participants were extracted from a neurobehavioral observational study database for this exploratory, retrospective analysis. Univariate optimal data analysis was conducted to determine if the number of neurostimulants influenced classification of four outcomes: recovery of full consciousness during rehabilitation, recovery of full consciousness within one year of injury, and meaningful neurobehavioral improvement during rehabilitation defined as either at least a 4.7 unit (minimal detectable change) or 2.58 unit (minimal clinically important difference) gain on the Disorders of Consciousness Scale-25 (DOCS-25). Results. Number of neurostimulants was not significantly (P>0.05) associated with recovery of full consciousness during rehabilitation, within one year of injury, or meaningful neurobehavioral improvement using the DOCS-25. Conclusions. Receiving multiple neurostimulants during rehabilitation may not influence recovery of full consciousness or meaningful neurobehavioral improvement. Given costs associated with additional medication, future research is needed to guide physicians about the merits of prescribing multiple neurostimulants during rehabilitation after severe BI

Sex Differences in Perceived Life Satisfaction and Functional Status One Year After Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

Aims: The primary aim of this study was to describe and compare perceived life satisfaction and perceived functional motor and cognitive status 1 year after severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) in males and females, adjusting for demographics and severity of injury. Methods: Data of 297 participants were abstracted from the National Institute on Disability Rehabilitation and Research (NIDRR)-funded Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems (TBIMS). Participants were aged 16-50, enrolled in the TBIMS study between the years 1998 and 2008, diagnosed with severe TBI (defined as having an initial Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score between 3 and 8), and with perceived life satisfaction and functional status data available at 1 year postinjury. Multiple linear regression models were used to estimate the association between sex, demographic variables, severity of injury, and the outcome variables. Results: Our findings indicate that sex did not significantly influence perceived satisfaction with life or motor function 1 year after severe TBI. However, females had significantly better (p = 0.031) cognitive outcomes compared to males 1 year after severe TBI, after controlling for demographics and severity of injury. Conclusions: Findings suggest that females may have better perceived cognitive functional outcomes than males 1 year after severe TBI. Further longitudinal research, including measurement of hormonal levels, is needed to determine if hormones influence outcomes of severe TBI as well as the trajectory of these outcomes. A better understanding of sex differences in outcomes after TBI will help clinicians improve strategies for rehabilitation