Pediatric Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations

Predicting and improving outcome in severe pediatric traumatic brain injury

INTRODUCTION

Severe pediatric traumatic brain injury (spTBI), including abusive head trauma (AHT) in young children, is a major public health problem. Long-term consequences of spTBI include a large variety of physical, neurological, biological, cognitive, behavioral and social deficits and impairments.

AREAS COVERED

The present narrative review summarizes studies and reviews published from January 2019 to February 2024 on spTBI. Significant papers published before 2019 were also included. The article gives coverage to the causes of spTBI, its epidemiology and fatality rates; disparities, inequalities, and socioeconomic factors; critical care; outcomes; and interventions.

EXPERT OPINION

There are disparities between countries and according to socio-economic factors regarding causes, treatments and outcomes of spTBI. AHT has an overall poor outcome. Adherence to critical care guidelines is imperfect and the evidence-base of guidelines needs further investigations. Neuroimaging and biomarker predictors of outcomes is a rapidly evolving domain. Long-term cognitive, behavioral and psychosocial difficulties are the most prevalent and disabling. Their investigation should make a clear distinction between objective (clinical examination, cognitive tests, facts) and subjective measures (estimations using patient- and proxy-reported questionnaires), considering possible common source bias in reported difficulties. Family/caregiver-focused interventions, ecological approaches, and use of technology in delivery of interventions are recommended to improve long-term difficulties after spTBI.

Low-Value Clinical Practices in Pediatric Trauma Care

Importance

Reducing low-value care has the potential to improve patient experiences and outcomes and decrease the unnecessary use of health care resources. Research suggests that low-value practices (ie, the potential for harm exceeds the potential for benefit) in adult trauma care are frequent and subject to interhospital variation; evidence on low-value practices in pediatric trauma care is lacking.

Objective

To estimate the incidence of low-value practices in pediatric trauma care and evaluate interhospital practice variation.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective multicenter cohort study in a Canadian provincial trauma system was conducted. Children younger than 16 years admitted to any of the 59 provincial trauma centers from April 1, 2016, to March 31, 2022, were included.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Low-value practices were identified from systematic reviews of clinical practice guidelines on pediatric trauma. The frequencies of low-value practices were evaluated by estimating incidence proportions and cases per 1000 admissions (low if ≤10% and ≤10 cases, moderate if >10% or >10 cases, and high if >10% and >10 cases) were identified. Interhospital variation with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were assessed (low if <5%, moderate if 5%-20%, and high if >20%).

Results

A total of 10 711 children were included (mean [SD] age, 7.4 [4.9] years; 6645 [62%] boys). Nineteen low-value practices on imaging, fluid resuscitation, hospital/intensive care unit admission, specialist consultation, deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis, and surgical management of solid organ injuries were identified. Of these, 14 (74%) could be evaluated using trauma registry data. Five practices had moderate to high frequencies and interhospital variation: head computed tomography in low-risk children (7.1%; 33 per 1000 admissions; ICC, 8.6%), pretransfer computed tomography in children with a clear indication for transfer (67.6%; 4 per 1000 admissions; ICC, 5.7%), neurosurgical consultation in children without clinically important intracranial lesions (11.6%; 13 per 1000 admissions; ICC, 15.8%), hospital admission in isolated mild traumatic brain injury (38.8%; 98 per 1000 admissions; ICC, 12.4%), and hospital admission in isolated minor blunt abdominal trauma (10%; 5 per 1000 admissions; ICC, 31%).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, low-value practices appeared to be frequent and subject to interhospital variation. These practices may represent priority targets for deimplementation interventions, particularly as they can be measured using routinely collected data.

Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations in Pediatric Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Our primary objectives were to identify clinical practice guideline recommendations for children with acute mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) presenting to an emergency department (ED), appraise their overall quality, and synthesize the quality of evidence and the strength of included recommendations.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, and medical association websites from January 2012 to May 2023 for clinical practice guidelines with at least 1 recommendation targeting pediatric mTBI populations presenting to the ED within 48 hours of injury for any diagnostic or therapeutic intervention in the acute phase of care (ED and inhospital). Pairs of reviewers independently assessed overall clinical practice guideline quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. The quality of evidence on recommendations was synthesized using a matrix based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence-to-Decision framework.

RESULTS

We included 11 clinical practice guidelines, of which 6 (55%) were rated high quality. These included 101 recommendations, of which 34 (34%) were based on moderate- to high-quality evidence, covering initial assessment, initial diagnostic imaging, monitoring/observation, therapeutic interventions, discharge advice, follow-up, and patient and family support. We did not identify any evidence-based recommendations in high-quality clinical practice guidelines for repeat imaging, neurosurgical consultation, or hospital admission. Lack of strategies and tools to aid implementation and editorial independence were the most common methodological weaknesses.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 34 recommendations based on moderate- to high-quality evidence that may be considered for implementation in clinical settings. Our review highlights important areas for future research. This review also underlines the importance of providing strategies to facilitate the implementation of clinical practice guideline recommendations for pediatric mTBI.

Clinical practice guideline recommendations to improve the mental health of adult trauma patients: protocol for a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Mental disorders are common in adult patients with traumatic injuries. To limit the burden of poor psychological well-being in this population, recognised authorities have issued recommendations through clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). However, the uptake of evidence-based recommendations to improve the mental health of trauma patients has been low until recently. This may be explained by the complexity of optimising mental health practices and interpretating CGPs scope and quality. Our aim is to systematically review CPG mental health recommendations in the context of trauma care and appraise their quality.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will identify CPG through a search strategy applied to Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases, as well as guidelines repositories and websites of trauma associations. We will target CPGs on adult and acute trauma populations including at least one recommendation on any prevention, screening, assessment, intervention, patient and family engagement, referral or follow-up procedure related to mental health endorsed by recognised organisations in high-income countries. No language limitations will be applied, and we will limit the search to the last 15 years. Pairs of reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, full texts, and carry out data extraction and quality assessment of CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II. We will synthesise the evidence on recommendations for CPGs rated as moderate or high quality using a matrix based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation quality of evidence, strength of recommendation, health and social determinants and whether recommendations were made using a population-based approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required, as we will conduct secondary analysis of published data. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, at international and national scientific meetings. Accessible summary will be distributed to interested parties through professional, healthcare quality and persons with lived experience associations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: (ID454728).