Association between ondansetron use and symptom persistence in children with concussions: A 5P substudy

Current evidence for pharmacological management of pediatric concussion: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is a global public health problem and its current management is limited to rest and symptom management. Despite frequent use of drugs for symptom control, there is a lack of consensus on the optimal pharmacological management of post-concussive symptoms. We reviewed the relevant literature to compile the evidence about the pharmaceutical management of pediatric mTBI.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature available in PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.Gov as well as through citation tracing. A modified PICO framework was used for the construction of search strategy and eligibility criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB-2 tool for randomized and ROBINS-I for non-randomized studies.

RESULTS

A total of 6260 articles were screened for eligibility. After exclusions, a total of 88 articles received full text review. A total of 15 reports representing 13 studies (5 randomized clinical trials, 1 prospective randomized cohort study, 1 prospective cohort study, and 6 retrospective cohort studies) met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. We identified 16 pharmacological interventions in a total of 931 pediatric patients with mTBI. Amytriptiline (n = 4), ondansetron (n = 3), melatonin (n = 3), metoclopramide (n = 2), magnesium (n = 2), and topiramate (n = 2) were investigated in multiple studies. All RCTs were relatively of small size (n ≤ 33/group).

CONCLUSION

The available evidence supporting pharmacological intervention in pediatric mild traumatic brain injury is scarce. We propose a framework to facilitate future collaborative research efforts to test and validate various pharmacological interventions for acute and persistent post-concussive symptoms in children.

Association of Pharmacological Interventions With Symptom Burden Reduction in Patients With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review

Importance

Mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) is experienced by 55.9 million people globally each year. The symptoms of mild TBI are diverse and sometimes long-lasting, requiring frequent use of pharmacological interventions to mitigate them. A thorough understanding of the data supporting pharmacological interventions is important for decision-making among clinicians treating this common injury.

Objective

To systematically review studies of pharmacological interventions and their associations with symptom burden reduction among patients with mild TBI and to use an evidence-based model to identify potential directions for future research that may aid in clinical decision-making.

Evidence Review

A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Search strings modified for the advanced search interfaces of each search engine were developed in consultation with a librarian and included combinations of search terms, such as brain concussion, post-concussion syndrome, mild traumatic brain injury, and pharmacological treatment. Articles published between January 1, 2000, and July 1, 2020, were analyzed. Studies were included if (1) they were clinical studies with discrete analyses of participants with mild TBI or complicated mild TBI, (2) they were assessments of a pharmacological intervention, (3) they included human participants, and (4) they were published in a peer-reviewed journal in the English language. Studies were excluded if the severity of TBI among participants could not be ascertained (ie, inadequate definition of mild TBI) and the inclusion criteria for the study required intracranial hemorrhage. A total of 23 studies examining 20 pharmacological interventions met the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias for Randomized Trials (for randomized clinical trials) and the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (for all other studies). Data were analyzed from June to September 2020.

Findings

A total of 1495 articles were identified; of those, 131 articles were excluded as duplicates. Titles and abstracts were screened for inclusion and exclusion criteria among the remaining 1364 articles, and 134 of those articles received a full-text review. After exclusions, 23 studies (11 randomized clinical trials, 7 prospective observational studies, 3 retrospective observational studies, and 2 case studies) examining 20 pharmacological interventions were identified for inclusion in the systematic review. Studies included 22 distinct participant populations comprising 8277 participants with mild TBI and 45 participants without TBI. Among 23 total studies, 8 studies specifically addressed the pediatric population, 9 studies had a low risk of bias, and 16 studies reported symptom burden reduction. Of the 20 pharmacological interventions examined in the studies, methylphenidate, sertraline hydrochloride, ondansetron, amitriptyline, and melatonin were the only medications included in multiple studies.

Conclusions and Relevance

This systematic review found a limited number of high-quality, clinically meaningful studies, particularly among children and individuals in the acute stage of injury; therefore, performing an evidence-based analysis that would inform clinical decision-making was not possible. Future studies are needed to focus on standardizing measures and increasing sample sizes (including large multicenter clinical trials) to generate a body of research that may provide additional options for the treatment of patients with mild TBI.

Practice Patterns in Pharmacological and Non-Pharmacological Therapies for Children with Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Survey of 15 Canadian and United States Centers

Given the lack of evidence regarding effective pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for pediatric mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and the resultant lack of treatment recommendations reflected in consensus guidelines, variation in the management of pediatric mTBI is to be expected. We therefore surveyed practitioners across 15 centers in the United States and Canada who care for children with pediatric mTBI to evaluate common-practice variation in the management of pediatric mTBI. The survey, developed by a panel of pediatric mTBI experts, consisted of a 10-item survey instrument regarding providers' perception of common pediatric mTBI symptoms and mTBI interventions. Surveys were distributed electronically to a convenience sample of local experts at each center. Frequencies and percentages (with confidence intervals [CI]) were determined for survey responses. One hundred and seven respondents (71% response rate) included specialists in pediatric Emergency Medicine, Sports Medicine, Neurology, Neurosurgery, Neuropsychology, Neuropsychiatry, Physical and Occupational Therapy, Physiatry/Rehabilitation, and General Pediatrics. Respondents rated headache as the most prevalently reported symptom after pediatric mTBI, followed by cognitive problems, dizziness, and irritability. Of the 65 (61%; [95% CI: 51,70]) respondents able to prescribe medications, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications (55%; [95% CI: 42,68]) and acetaminophen (59%; [95% CI: 46,71]) were most commonly recommended. One in five respondents reported prescribing amitriptyline for headache management after pediatric mTBI, whereas topiramate (8%; [95% CI: 3,17]) was less commonly reported. For cognitive problems, methylphenidate (11%; [95% CI: 4,21]) was used more commonly than amantadine (2%; [95% CI: 0,8]). The most common non-pharmacological interventions were rest ("always" or "often" recommended by 83% [95% CI: 63,92] of the 107 respondents), exercise (59%; [95%CI: 49,69]), vestibular therapy (42% [95%CI: 33,53]) and cervical spine exercises (29% [95%CI: 21,39]). Self-reported utilization for common pediatric mTBI interventions varied widely across our Canadian and United States consortium. Future effectiveness studies for pediatric mTBI are urgently needed to advance the evidence-based care.