Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a global public health problem and a leading cause of mortality, morbidity, and disability. The increasing incidence combined with the heterogeneity and complexity... Show moreTraumatic brain injury (TBI) is a global public health problem and a leading cause of mortality, morbidity, and disability. The increasing incidence combined with the heterogeneity and complexity of TBI will inevitably place a substantial burden on health systems. These findings emphasize the importance of obtaining accurate and timely insights into healthcare consumption and costs on a multi-national scale. This study aimed to describe intramural healthcare consumption and costs across the full spectrum of TBI in Europe. The Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) core study is a prospective observational study conducted in 18 countries across Europe and in Israel. The baseline Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was used to differentiate patients by brain injury severity in mild (GCS 13-15), moderate (GCS 9-12), or severe (GCS & LE;8) TBI. We analyzed seven main cost categories: pre-hospital care, hospital admission, surgical interventions, imaging, laboratory, blood products, and rehabilitation. Costs were estimated based on Dutch reference prices and converted to country-specific unit prices using gross domestic product (GDP)-purchasing power parity (PPP) adjustment. Mixed linear regression was used to identify between-country differences in length of stay (LOS), as a parameter of healthcare consumption. Mixed generalized linear models with gamma distribution and log link function quantified associations of patient characteristics with higher total costs. We included 4349 patients, of whom 2854 (66%) had mild, 371 (9%) had moderate, and 962 (22%) had severe TBI. Hospitalization accounted for the largest part of the intramural consumption and costs (60%). In the total study population, the mean LOS was 5.1 days at the intensive care unit (ICU) and 6.3 days at the ward. For mild, moderate, and severe TBI, mean LOS was, respectively, 1.8, 8.9, and 13.5 days at the ICU and 4.5, 10.1, and 10.3 days at the ward. Other large contributors to the total costs were rehabilitation (19%) and intracranial surgeries (8%). Total costs increased with higher age and greater trauma severity (mild; euro3,800 [IQR euro1,400-14,000], moderate; euro37,800 [IQR euro14,900-euro74,200], severe; euro60,400 [IQR euro24,400-euro112,700]). The adjusted analysis showed that female patients had lower costs than male patients (odds ratio (OR) 0.80 [CI 0.75-1.85]). Increasing TBI severity was associated with higher costs, OR 1.46 (confidence interval [CI] 1.31-1.63) and OR 1.67 [CI 1.52-1.84] for moderate and severe patients, respectively. A worse pre-morbid overall health state, increasing age and more severe systemic trauma, expressed in the Injury Severity Score (ISS), were also significantly associated with higher costs. Intramural costs of TBI are significant and are profoundly driven by hospitalization. Costs increased with trauma severity and age, and male patients incurred higher costs. Reducing LOS could be targeted with advanced care planning, in order to provide cost-effective care. Show less
BACKGROUND The role of glucocorticoids without surgical evacuation in the treatment of chronic subdural hematoma is unclear.METHODS In this multicenter, open-label, controlled, noninferiority trial... Show moreBACKGROUND The role of glucocorticoids without surgical evacuation in the treatment of chronic subdural hematoma is unclear.METHODS In this multicenter, open-label, controlled, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned symptomatic patients with chronic subdural hematoma in a 1:1 ratio to a 19-day tapering course of dexamethasone or to burr-hole drainage. The primary end point was the functional outcome at 3 months after randomization, as assessed by the score on the modified Rankin scale (range, 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]). Non-inferiority was defined by a lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of the odds ratio for a better functional outcome with dexamethasone than with surgery of 0.9 or more. Secondary end points included scores on the Markwalder Grading Scale of symptom severity and on the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale.RESULTS From September 2016 through February 2021, we enrolled 252 patients of a planned sample size of 420; 127 were assigned to the dexamethasone group and 125 to the surgery group. The mean age of the patients was 74 years, and 77% were men. The trial was terminated early by the data and safety monitoring board owing to safety and outcome concerns in the dexamethasone group. The adjusted common odds ratio for a lower (better) score on the modified Rankin scale at 3 months with dexamethasone than with surgery was 0.55 (95% confidence interval, 0.34 to 0.90), which failed to show noninferiority of dexamethasone. The scores on the Markwalder Grading Scale and Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale were generally supportive of the results of the primary analysis. Complications occurred in 59% of the patients in the dexamethasone group and 32% of those in the surgery group, and additional surgery was performed in 55% and 6%, respectively.CONCLUSIONS In a trial that involved patients with chronic subdural hematoma and that was stopped early, dexamethasone treatment was not found to be noninferior to burrhole drainage with respect to functional outcomes and was associated with more complications and a greater likelihood of later surgery. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and others; DECSA EudraCT number, 2015-001563 -39.) Show less
Mikolic, A.; Steyerberg, E.W.; Polinder, S.; Wilson, L.; Zeldovich, M.; Steinbuechel, N. von; ... ; CENTER-TBI Participants 2023
After mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), a substantial proportion of individuals do not fully recover on the Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) or experience persistent post-concussion symptoms... Show moreAfter mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), a substantial proportion of individuals do not fully recover on the Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) or experience persistent post-concussion symptoms (PPCS). We aimed to develop prognostic models for the GOSE and PPCS at 6 months after mTBI and to assess the prognostic value of different categories of predictors (clinical variables; questionnaires; computed tomography [CT]; blood biomarkers). From the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study, we included participants aged 16 or older with Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) 13-15. We used ordinal logistic regression to model the relationship between predictors and the GOSE, and linear regression to model the relationship between predictors and the Rivermead Post-concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ) total score. First, we studied a pre-specified Core model. Next, we extended the Core model with other clinical and sociodemographic variables available at presentation (Clinical model). The Clinical model was then extended with variables assessed before discharge from hospital: early post-concussion symptoms, CT variables, biomarkers, or all three categories (extended models). In a subset of patients mostly discharged home from the emergency department, the Clinical model was extended with 2-3-week post-concussion and mental health symptoms. Predictors were selected based on Akaike's Information Criterion. Performance of ordinal models was expressed as a concordance index (C) and performance of linear models as proportion of variance explained (R2). Bootstrap validation was used to correct for optimism. We included 2376 mTBI patients with 6-month GOSE and 1605 patients with 6-month RPQ. The Core and Clinical models for GOSE showed moderate discrimination (C = 0.68 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 0.70 and C = 0.70[0.69 to 0.71], respectively) and injury severity was the strongest predictor. The extended models had better discriminative ability (C = 0.71[0.69 to 0.72] with early symptoms; 0.71[0.70 to 0.72] with CT variables or with blood biomarkers; 0.72[0.71 to 0.73] with all three categories). The performance of models for RPQ was modest (R2 = 4% Core; R2 = 9% Clinical), and extensions with early symptoms increased the R2 to 12%. The 2-3-week models had better performance for both outcomes in the subset of participants with these symptoms measured (C = 0.74 [0.71 to 0.78] vs. C = 0.63[0.61 to 0.67] for GOSE; R2 = 37% vs. 6% for RPQ). In conclusion, the models based on variables available before discharge have moderate performance for the prediction of GOSE and poor performance for the prediction of PPCS. Symptoms assessed at 2-3 weeks are required for better predictive ability of both outcomes. The performance of the proposed models should be examined in independent cohorts. Show less
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) can negatively impact patients' lives on many dimensions. Multiple instruments are available for evaluating TBI outcomes, but it is still unclear which instruments are... Show moreTraumatic brain injury (TBI) can negatively impact patients' lives on many dimensions. Multiple instruments are available for evaluating TBI outcomes, but it is still unclear which instruments are the most sensitive for that purpose. This study examines the sensitivity of nine outcome instruments in terms of their ability to discriminate within and between specific patient groups, selected a priori as identified from the literature, at three different time points within a year after TBI (i.e., 3, 6, and 12 months post injury). The sensitivity of the instruments to sociodemographic (sex, age, education), premorbid (psychological health status), and injury-related (clinical care pathways, TBI and extracranial injury severity) factors was assessed by means of cross-sectional multivariate Wei-Lachin analyses. The Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE)-the standard in the field of TBI for measuring functional recovery-demonstrated the highest sensitivity in most group comparisons. However, as single functional scale, it may not be able to reflect the multidimensional nature of the outcome. Therefore, the GOSE was used as a reference for further sensitivity analyses on more specific outcome scales, addressing further potential deficits following TBI. The physical component summary score (PCS) of the generic health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments (SF-36v2/-12v2) and the TBI-specific HRQOL instruments (QOLIBRI/-OS) were most sensitive in distinguishing recovery after TBI across all time points and patient groups, followed by the RPQ assessing post-concussion symptoms and the PHQ-9 measuring depression. The SF-36v2/-12v2 mental component summary score and the GAD-7 measuring anxiety were less sensitive in several group comparisons. The assessment of the functional recovery status combined with generic HRQOL (the PCS of the SF-12v2), disease-specific HRQOL (QOLIBRI-OS), and post-concussion symptoms (RPQ) can provide a sensitive, comprehensive, yet time-efficient evaluation of the health status of individuals after TBI in different patient groups. Show less
Objective: To update the existing CHIP (CT in Head Injury Patients) decision rule for detection of (in-tra)cranial findings in adult patients following minor head injury (MHI).Methods: The study is... Show moreObjective: To update the existing CHIP (CT in Head Injury Patients) decision rule for detection of (in-tra)cranial findings in adult patients following minor head injury (MHI).Methods: The study is a prospective multicenter cohort study in the Netherlands. Consecutive MHI pa-tients of 16 years and older were included. Primary outcome was any (intra)cranial traumatic finding on computed tomography (CT). Secondary outcomes were any potential neurosurgical lesion and neuro-surgical intervention. The CHIP model was validated and subsequently updated and revised. Diagnostic performance was assessed by calculating the c-statistic. Results: Among 4557 included patients 3742 received a CT (82%). In 383 patients (8.4%) a traumatic find-ing was present on CT. A potential neurosurgical lesion was found in 73 patients (1.6%) with 26 (0.6%) patients that actually had neurosurgery or died as a result of traumatic brain injury. The original CHIP underestimated the risk of traumatic (intra)cranial findings in low-predicted-risk groups, while in high -predicted-risk groups the risk was overestimated. The c-statistic of the original CHIP model was 0.72 (95% CI 0.69-0.74) and it would have missed two potential neurosurgical lesions and one patient that underwent neurosurgery. The updated model performed similar to the original model regarding trau-matic (intra)cranial findings (c-statistic 0.77 95% CI 0.74-0.79, after crossvalidation c-statistic 0.73). The updated CHIP had the same CT rate as the original CHIP (75%) and a similar sensitivity (92 versus 93%) and specificity (both 27%) for any traumatic (intra)cranial finding. However, the updated CHIP would not have missed any (potential) neurosurgical lesions and had a higher sensitivity for (potential) neurosurgi-cal lesions or death as a result of traumatic brain injury (100% versus 96%).Conclusions: Use of the updated CHIP decision rule is a good alternative to current decision rules for patients with MHI. In contrast to the original CHIP the update identified all patients with (potential) neurosurgical lesions without increasing CT rate.(c) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ) Show less
Background: Following traumatic brain injury (TBI), the clinical focus is often on disability. However, patients' perceptions of well-being can be discordant with their disability level, referred... Show moreBackground: Following traumatic brain injury (TBI), the clinical focus is often on disability. However, patients' perceptions of well-being can be discordant with their disability level, referred to as the 'disability paradox'. We aimed to examine the relationship between disability and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) following TBI, while taking variation in personal, injury-related and environment factors into account. Methods: We used data from the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury study. Disability was assessed 6 months post-injury by the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE). HRQoL was assessed by the SF-12v2 physical and mental component summary scores and the Quality of Life after Traumatic Brain Injury overall scale. We examined mean total and domain HRQoL scores by GOSE. We quantified variance in HRQoL explained by GOSE, personal, injury-related and environment factors with multivariable regression. Results: Six-month outcome assessments were completed in 2075 patients, of whom 78% had mild TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale 13-15). Patients with severe disability had higher HRQoL than expected on the basis of GOSE alone, particularly after mild TBI. Up to 50% of patients with severe disability reported HRQoL scores within the normative range. GOSE, personal, injury-related and environment factors explained a limited amount of variance in HRQoL (up to 29%). Conclusion: Contrary to the idea that discrepancies are unusual, many patients with poor functional outcomes reported well-being that was at or above the boundary considered satisfactory for the normative sample. These findings challenge the idea that satisfactory HRQoL in patients with disability should be described as 'paradoxical' and question common views of what constitutes 'unfavourable' outcome. Show less
Loggers, S.A.I.; Willems, H.C.; Balen, R. van; Gosens, T.; Polinder, S.; Ponsen, K.J.; ... ; FRAIL-HIP Study Grp 2022
IMPORTANCE Decision-making on management of proximal femoral fractures in frail patients with limited life expectancy is challenging, but surgical overtreatment needs to be prevented. Current... Show moreIMPORTANCE Decision-making on management of proximal femoral fractures in frail patients with limited life expectancy is challenging, but surgical overtreatment needs to be prevented. Current literature provides limited insight into the true outcomes of nonoperative management and operative management in this patient population. OBJECTIVE To investigate the outcomes of nonoperative management vs operative management of proximal femoral fractures in institutionalized frail older patients with limited life expectancy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This multicenter cohort studywas conducted between September 1, 2018, and April 25, 2020, with a 6-month follow-up period at 25 hospitals across the Netherlands. Eligible patientswere aged 70 years or older, frail, and institutionalized and sustained a femoral neck or pertrochanteric fracture. The term frail implied at least 1 of the following characteristicswas present: malnutrition (body mass index [calculated asweight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared] <18.5) or cachexia, severe comorbidities (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class of IV or V), or severe mobility issues (Functional Ambulation Category similar to 2). EXPOSURES Shared decision-making (SDM) followed by nonoperative or operative fracture management. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomewas the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level (EQ-5D) utility score by proxies and caregivers. Secondary outcome measures were QUALIDEM (a dementia-specific quality-of-life instrument for persons with dementia in residential settings) scores, pain level (assessed by the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors With Limited Ability to Communicate), adverse events (Clavien-Dindo classification), mortality, treatment satisfaction (numeric rating scale), and quality of dying (Quality of Dying and Death Questionnaire). RESULTS Of the 172 enrolled patients with proximal femoral fractures (median [25th and 75th percentile] age, 88 [85-92] years; 135women [78%]), 88 opted for nonoperative management and 84 opted for operative management. The EQ-5D utility scores by proxies and caregivers in the nonoperative management group remained within the set 0.15 noninferiority limit of the operative management group (week 1: 0.17 [95% CI, 0.13-0.29] vs 0.26 [95% CI, 0.11-0.23]; week 2: 0.19 [95% CI, 0.10-0.27] vs 0.28 [95% CI, 0.22-0.35]; and week 4: 0.24 [95% CI, 0.15-0.33] vs 0.34 [95% CI, 0.28-0.41]). Adverse eventswere less frequent in the nonoperative management group vs the operative management group (67 vs 167). The 30-day mortality rate was 83%(n = 73) in the nonoperative management group and 25%(n = 21) in the operative management group, with 26 proxies and caregivers (51%) in the nonoperative management group rating the quality of dying as good-almost perfect. Treatment satisfaction was high in both groups, with a median numeric rating scale score of 8. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Results of this study indicated that nonoperative management of proximal femoral fractures (selected through an SDM process) was a viable option for frail institutionalized patients with limited life expectancy, suggesting that surgery should not be a foregone conclusion for this patient population. Show less
Background Chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) is a frequent pathological entity in daily clinical practice. However, evidence-based CSDH-guidelines are lacking and level I evidence from randomized... Show moreBackground Chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) is a frequent pathological entity in daily clinical practice. However, evidence-based CSDH-guidelines are lacking and level I evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is limited. In order to establish and subsequently implement a guideline, insight into current clinical practice and attitudes toward CSDH-treatment is required. The aim is to explore current practice and attitudes toward CSDH-management in the Netherlands. Methods A national online survey was distributed among Dutch neurologists and neurosurgeons, examining variation in current CSDH-management through questions on treatment options, (peri)operative management, willingness to adopt new treatments and by presenting four CSDH-cases. Results One hundred nineteen full responses were received (8% of neurologists, N = 66 and 35% of neurosurgeons, N = 53). A majority of the respondents had a positive experience with burr-hole craniostomy (93%) and with a conservative policy (56%). Around a third had a positive experience with the use of dexamethasone as primary (30%) and additional (33.6%) treatment. These numbers were also reflected in the treatment preferences in the presented cases. (Peri)operative management corresponded among responding neurosurgeons. Most respondents would be willing to implement dexamethasone (98%) if equally effective as surgery and tranexamic acid (93%) if effective in CSDH-management. Conclusion Variation was found regarding preferential CSDH-treatment. However, this is considered not to be insurmountable when implementing evidence-based treatments. This baseline inventory on current clinical practice and current attitudes toward CSDH-treatment is a stepping-stone in the eventual development and implementation of a national guideline. Show less
Helmrich, I.R.A.R.; Klaveren, D. van; Dijkland, S.A.; Lingsma, H.F.; Polinder, S.; Wilson, L.; ... ; CENTER TBI Collaborators 2021
Background Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of impairments affecting Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). We aimed to identify predictors of and develop prognostic models for... Show moreBackground Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of impairments affecting Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). We aimed to identify predictors of and develop prognostic models for HRQoL following TBI. Methods We used data from the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) Core study, including patients with a clinical diagnosis of TBI and an indication for computed tomography presenting within 24 h of injury. The primary outcome measures were the SF-36v2 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) health component summary scores and the Quality of Life after Traumatic Brain Injury (QOLIBRI) total score 6 months post injury. We considered 16 patient and injury characteristics in linear regression analyses. Model performance was expressed as proportion of variance explained (R-2) and corrected for optimism with bootstrap procedures. Results 2666 Adult patients completed the HRQoL questionnaires. Most were mild TBI patients (74%). The strongest predictors for PCS were Glasgow Coma Scale, major extracranial injury, and pre-injury health status, while MCS and QOLIBRI were mainly related to pre-injury mental health problems, level of education, and type of employment. R-2 of the full models was 19% for PCS, 9% for MCS, and 13% for the QOLIBRI. In a subset of patients following predominantly mild TBI (N = 436), including 2 week HRQoL assessment improved model performance substantially (R-2 PCS 15% to 37%, MCS 12% to 36%, and QOLIBRI 10% to 48%). Conclusion Medical and injury-related characteristics are of greatest importance for the prediction of PCS, whereas patient-related characteristics are more important for the prediction of MCS and the QOLIBRI following TBI. Show less
Steinbuechel, N. von; Rauen, K.; Krenz, U.; Wu, Y.J.; Covic, A.; Plass, A.M.; ... ; Linguistic Validation Grp CENTER 2021
Assessing outcomes in multinational studies on traumatic brain injury (TBI) poses major challenges and requires relevant instruments in languages other than English. Of the 19 outcome instruments... Show moreAssessing outcomes in multinational studies on traumatic brain injury (TBI) poses major challenges and requires relevant instruments in languages other than English. Of the 19 outcome instruments selected for use in the observational Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI (CENTER-TBI) study, 17 measures lacked translations in at least one target language. To fill this gap, we aimed to develop well-translated linguistically and psychometrically validated instruments. We performed translations and linguistic validations of patient-reported measures (PROMs), clinician-reported (ClinRO), and performance-based (PerfO) outcome instruments, using forward and backward translations, reconciliations, cognitive debriefings with up to 10 participants, iterative revisions, and international harmonization with input from over 150 international collaborators. In total, 237 translations and 211 linguistic validations were carried out in up to 20 languages. Translations were evaluated at the linguistic and cultural level by coding changes when the original versions are compared with subsequent translation steps, using the output of cognitive debriefings, and using comprehension rates. The average comprehension rate per instrument varied from 88% to 98%, indicating a good quality of the translations. These outcome instruments provide a solid basis for future TBI research and clinical practice and allow the aggregation and analysis of data across different countries and languages. Show less
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) may lead to impairments in various outcome domains. Since most instruments assessing these are only available in a limited number of languages, psychometrically... Show moreTraumatic brain injury (TBI) may lead to impairments in various outcome domains. Since most instruments assessing these are only available in a limited number of languages, psychometrically validated translations are important for research and clinical practice. Thus, our aim was to investigate the psychometric properties of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) applied in the CENTER-TBI study. The study sample comprised individuals who filled in the six-months assessments (GAD-7, PHQ-9, PCL-5, RPQ, QOLIBRI/-OS, SF-36v2/-12v2). Classical psychometric characteristics were investigated and compared with those of the original English versions. The reliability was satisfactory to excellent; the instruments were comparable to each other and to the original versions. Validity analyses demonstrated medium to high correlations with well-established measures. The original factor structure was replicated by all the translations, except for the RPQ, SF-36v2/-12v2 and some language samples for the PCL-5, most probably due to the factor structure of the original instruments. The translation of one to two items of the PHQ-9, RPQ, PCL-5, and QOLIBRI in three languages could be improved in the future to enhance scoring and application at the individual level. Researchers and clinicians now have access to reliable and valid instruments to improve outcome assessment after TBI in national and international health care. Show less
Sewalt, C.A.; Venema, E.; Zwet, E. van; Ditshuizen, J.C. van; Schuit, S.C.E.; Polinder, S.; ... ; LTR Res Grp 2021
Centralization of trauma centers leads to a higher hospital volume of severely injured patients (Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15), but the effect of volume on outcome remains unclear. The aim... Show moreCentralization of trauma centers leads to a higher hospital volume of severely injured patients (Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15), but the effect of volume on outcome remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the association between hospital volume of severely injured patients and in-hospital mortality in Dutch Level-1 trauma centers. A retrospective observational cohort study was performed using the Dutch trauma registry. All severely injured adults (ISS > 15) admitted to a Level-1 trauma center between 2015 and 2018 were included. The effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality was analyzed with random effects logistic regression models with a random intercept for Level-1 trauma center, adjusted for important demographic and injury characteristics. A total of 11,917 severely injured patients from 13 Dutch Level-1 trauma centers was included in this study. Hospital volume varied from 120 to 410 severely injured patients per year. Observed mortality rates varied between 12% and 24% per center. After case-mix correction, no statistically significant differences between low- and high-volume centers were demonstrated (adjusted odds ratio 0.97 per 50 extra patients per year, 95% Confidence Interval 0.90-1.04, p = 0.44). The variation in hospital volume of the included Level-1 trauma centers was not associated with the outcome of severely injured patients. Our results suggest that well-organized trauma centers with a similar organization of care could potentially achieve comparable outcomes. Show less
Munter, L. de; Polinder, S.; Havermans, R.J.M.; Steyerberg, E.W.; Jongh, M.A.C. de 2021
Objectives To determine prognostic factors for health status and recovery patterns during the first 2 years after injury in the clinical trauma population. Design A prospective longitudinal cohort... Show moreObjectives To determine prognostic factors for health status and recovery patterns during the first 2 years after injury in the clinical trauma population. Design A prospective longitudinal cohort study. Setting Ten participating hospitals in Brabant, the Netherlands. Participants Injured adult patients admitted to a hospital between August 2015 and November 2016 were followed: 4883 (50%) patients participated. Main outcome measures Primary outcome was health status, measured with the EuroQol-5-dimensions-3-levels (EQ-5D), including a cognition item and the EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale. Health status was collected at 1 week, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after injury. Potential prognostic factors were based on literature and clinical experience (eg, age, sex, pre-injury frailty (Groningen Frailty Index), pre-injury EQ-5D). Results Health status increased mainly during the first 6 months after injury with a mean EQ-5D utility score at 1 week of 0.49 and 0.79 at 24 months. The dimensions mobility, pain/discomfort and usual activities improved up to 2 years after injury. Lower pre-injury health status, frailty and longer length of stay at the hospital were important prognostic factors for poor recovery. Spine injury, lower and upper extremity injury showed to be prognostic factors for problems after injury. Traumatic brain injury was a prognostic factor for cognitive problems. Conclusion This study contributes to the increase in knowledge of health recovery after injury. It could be a starting point to develop prediction models for specific injury classifications and implementation of personalised medicine. Show less
Mikolic, A.; Polinder, S.; Steyerberg, E.W.; Helmrich, I.R.A.R.; Giacino, J.T.; Maas, A.I.R.; ... ; CENTER TBI Study Pa 2020
The majority of traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) are categorized as mild, according to a baseline Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 13-15. Prognostic models that were developed to predict functional... Show moreThe majority of traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) are categorized as mild, according to a baseline Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 13-15. Prognostic models that were developed to predict functional outcome and persistent post-concussive symptoms (PPCS) after mild TBI have rarely been externally validated. We aimed to externally validate models predicting 3-12-month Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) or PPCS in adults with mild TBI. We analyzed data from the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) project, which included 2862 adults with mild TBI, with 6-month GOSE available for 2374 and Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ) results available for 1605 participants. Model performance was evaluated based on calibration (graphically and characterized by slope and intercept) and discrimination (C-index). We validated five published models for 6-month GOSE and three for 6-month PPCS scores. The models used different cutoffs for outcome and some included symptoms measured 2 weeks post-injury. Discriminative ability varied substantially (C-index between 0.58 and 0.79). The models developed in the Corticosteroid Randomisation After Significant Head Injury (CRASH) trial for prediction of GOSE <5 discriminated best (C-index 0.78 and 0.79), but were poorly calibrated. The best performing models for PPCS included 2-week symptoms (C-index 0.75 and 0.76). In conclusion, none of the prognostic models for early prediction of GOSE and PPCS has both good calibration and discrimination in persons with mild TBI. In future studies, prognostic models should be tailored to the population with mild TBI, predicting relevant end-points based on readily available predictors. Show less
Wijk, R.P.J. van; Dijck, J.T.J.M. van; Timmers, M.; Veen, E. van; Citerio, G.; Lingsma, H.F.; ... ; CENTER-TB1 Investigators 2020
Purpose: Enrolling traumatic brain injury (731) patients with an inability to provide informed consent in research is challenging. Alternatives to patient consent are not sufficiently embedded in... Show morePurpose: Enrolling traumatic brain injury (731) patients with an inability to provide informed consent in research is challenging. Alternatives to patient consent are not sufficiently embedded in European and national legislation, which allows procedural variation and bias. We aimed to quantify variations in informed consent policy and practice.Methods: Variation was explored in the CENTER-TBI study. Policies were reported by using a questionnaire and national legislation. Data on used informed consent procedures were available for 4498 patients from 57 centres across 17 European countries.Results: Variation in the use of informed consent procedures was found between and within EU member states. Proxy informed consent (N = 1377;64%) was the most frequently used type of consent in the ICU, followed by patient informed consent (N 426;20%) and deferred consent (N 334;16%). Deferred consent was only actively used in 15 centres (26%), although it was considered valid in 47 centres (82%).Conclusions: Alternatives to patient consent are essential for TBI research. While there seems to be concordance amongst national legislations, there is regional variability in institutional practices with respect to the use of different informed consent procedures. Variation could be caused by several reasons, including inconsistencies in clear legislation or knowledge of such legislation amongst researchers. (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc. Show less
AbstractBackground: The high occurrence and acute and chronic sequelae of traumatic brain injury (TBI) cause major healthcare and socioeconomic challenges. This study aimed to describe outcome, in... Show moreAbstractBackground: The high occurrence and acute and chronic sequelae of traumatic brain injury (TBI) cause major healthcare and socioeconomic challenges. This study aimed to describe outcome, in-hospital healthcare consumption and in-hospital costs of patients with TBI.Methods: We used data from hospitalised TBI patients that were included in the prospective observational CENTER-TBI study in three Dutch Level I Trauma Centres from 2015 to 2017. Clinical data was completed with data on in-hospital healthcare consumption and costs. TBI severity was classified using the Glasgow Coma Score (GCS). Patient outcome was measured by in-hospital mortality and Glasgow Outcome Score-Extended (GOSE) at 6 months. In-hospital costs were calculated following the Dutch guidelines for cost calculation.Results: A total of 486 TBI patients were included. Mean age was 56.1 ± 22.4 years and mean GCS was 12.7 ± 3.8. Six-month mortality (4.2%-66.7%), unfavourable outcome (GOSE ≤ 4) (14.6%-80.4%) and full recovery (GOSE = 8) (32.5%-5.9%) rates varied from patients with mild TBI (GCS13-15) to very severe TBI (GCS3-5). Length of stay (8 ± 13 days) and in-hospital costs (€11,920) were substantial and increased with higher TBI severity, presence of intracranial abnormalities, extracranial injury and surgical intervention. Costs were primarily driven by admission (66%) and surgery (13%).Conclusion: In-hospital mortality and unfavourable outcome rates were rather high, but many patients also achieved full recovery. Hospitalised TBI patients show substantial in-hospital healthcare consumption and costs, even in patients with mild TBI. Because these costs are likely to be an underestimation of the actual total costs, more research is required to investigate the actual costs-effectiveness of TBI care.Keywords: Functional outcome; In-hospital costs; Mortality; Traumatic brain injury. Show less
Munter, L. de; Polinder, S.; Haagsma, J.A.; Kruithof, N.; Ree, C.L.P. van de; Steyerberg, E.W.; Jongh, M. de 2020
Objective: To describe the prevalence and prognostic factors of symptoms of anxiety and depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) after injury in the clinical trauma population.Design:... Show moreObjective: To describe the prevalence and prognostic factors of symptoms of anxiety and depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) after injury in the clinical trauma population.Design: Multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study.Setting: Ten hospitals in Noord-Brabant, The Netherlands.Participants: Four thousand two hundred thirty-nine adult patients (N=4239) admitted due to injury between August 2015 and December 2016.Interventions: Patients were asked to complete a questionnaire at 1 week and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after injury.Main Outcome Measures: The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was used to assess anxiety and depressive symptoms and the Impact of Event Scale was used to assess PTSS.Results: The prevalence of symptoms of anxiety and depression decreased from 10% and 12%, respectively, at 1 week after injury to 7% and 7% at 12 months after injury. Acute traumatic stress symptoms were present in 13% at 1 week and PTSS was prevalent in 10% of the participants at 12 months after injury. Strong prognostic factors for poor psychological outcome in multivariable logistic mixed models were preinjury frailty, psychological complaints and nonworking status preinjury, female sex, low educational level, and accident category (ie, traffic accident, work-related accident, or accidents at home compared to sport injuries).Conclusions: Psychological distress is a common health problem during the first year after injury. Important prognostic factors for psychological distress include psychological complaints before injury and frailty. Early recognition of psychological problems after injury could facilitate discussion between caregivers and patients and improve recovery. (C) 2019 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine Show less
The objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive examination of the relation of complicated and uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) with multidimensional outcomes at three-... Show moreThe objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive examination of the relation of complicated and uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) with multidimensional outcomes at three- and six-months after TBI. We analyzed data from the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research (CENTER-TBI) research project. Patients after mTBI (Glasgow Coma scale (GCS) score of 13-15) enrolled in the study were differentiated into two groups based on computed tomography (CT) findings: complicated mTBI (presence of any traumatic intracranial injury on first CT) and uncomplicated mTBI (absence of any traumatic intracranial injury on first CT). Multidimensional outcomes were assessed using seven instruments measuring generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (SF-36 and QOLIBRI), functional outcome (GOSE), and psycho-social domains including symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (PCL-5), depression (PHQ-9), and anxiety (GAD-7). Data were analyzed using a multivariate repeated measures approach (MANOVA-RM), which inspected mTBI groups at three- and six-months post injury. Patients after complicated mTBI had significantly lower GOSE scores, reported lower physical and mental component summary scores based on the SF-36 version 2, and showed significantly lower HRQoL measured by QOLIBRI compared to those after uncomplicated mTBI. There was no difference between mTBI groups when looking at psychological outcomes, however, a slight improvement in PTSD symptoms and depression was observed for the entire sample from three to six months. Patients after complicated mTBI reported lower generic and disease specific HRQoL and worse functional outcome compared to individuals after uncomplicated mTBI at three and six months. Both groups showed a tendency to improve from three to six months after TBI. The complicated mTBI group included more patients with an impaired long-term outcome than the uncomplicated group. Nevertheless, patients, clinicians, researchers, and decisions-makers in health care should take account of the short and long-term impact on outcome for patients after both uncomplicated and complicated mTBI. Show less
