CORE
🇺🇦
make metadata, not war
Services
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Community governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
Cuidados generales en el manejo del traumatismo craneoencefálico grave: consenso latinoamericano
Authors
S. Aguilera-Rodríguez
J. N. Carreño-Rodríguez
+22 more
F. Ciccioli
J. D. Ciro
S. da Re-Gutiérrez
G. Domeniconi
D. Fischer
L. C. Fuenzalida
D. A. Godoy
O. Hernández
M. Jibaja
A. Lacerda-Gallardo
F. S. Lora
J. Mejía
J. M. Montes
P. Panhke
J. L. Parahnos
G. Piñero
C. Romero
R. Santa Cruz
X. Silva
C. Soler-Morejón
J. L. Sufan
W. Videtta
Publication date
11 June 2020
Publisher
Ediciones Doyma, S.L.
Abstract
Severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) remains prevalent in the young adult population. Indeed, far from descending, the incidence of sTBI remains high. One of the key bases of treatment is to avoid, detect and correct secondary injuries of systemic origin, which aggravate the primary lesion. Much of this can be achieved by maintaining an adequate physiological microenvironment allowing recovery of the damaged brain tissue. General care measures are nonspecific actions designed to meet that objective. The available guidelines on the management of sTBI have not included the topics contemplated in this consensus. In this regard, a group of members of the Latin American Brain Injury Consortium (LABIC), involved in the different aspects of the acute management of sTBI (neurosurgeons, intensivists, anesthesiologists, neurologists, nurses and physiotherapists) were gathered. An exhaustive literature search was made of selected topics in the LILACS, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials and Web of Science databases. To establish recommendations or suggestions with their respective strength or weakness, the GRADE methodology (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was applied. Additionally, certain recommendations (included in complementary material) were not assessed by GRADE, because they constitute a set of therapeutic actions of effective compliance, in which it was not possible to apply the said methodology. Thirty-two recommendations were established, 16 strong and 16 weak, with their respective levels of evidence. This consensus attempts to standardize and establish basic general care measures in this particular patient population. © 2020 Elsevier España, S.L.U. y SEMICYU
Similar works
Full text
Available Versions
edocUR
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:repository.urosario.edu.co...
Last time updated on 20/06/2020