Neurotrauma clinicians' perspectives on the contextual challenges associated with long-term follow-up following traumatic brain injury in low-income and middle-income countries: a qualitative study protocol

Nervous System Response to Neurotrauma: A Narrative Review of Cerebrovascular and Cellular Changes After Neurotrauma

Neurotrauma is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. For instance, traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes more than 30% of all injury-related deaths in the USA annually. The underlying cause and clinical sequela vary among cases. Patients are liable to both acute and chronic changes in the nervous system after such a type of injury. Cerebrovascular disruption has the most common and serious effect in such cases because cerebrovascular autoregulation, which is one of the main determinants of cerebral perfusion pressure, can be effaced in brain injuries even in the absence of evident vascular injury. Disruption of the blood-brain barrier regulatory function may also ensue whether due to direct injury to its structure or metabolic changes. Furthermore, the autonomic nervous system (ANS) can be affected leading to sympathetic hyperactivity in many patients. On a cellular scale, the neuroinflammatory cascade medicated by the glial cells gets triggered in response to TBI. Nevertheless, cellular and molecular reactions involved in cerebrovascular repair are not fully understood yet. Most studies were done on animals with many drawbacks in interpreting results. Therefore, future studies including human subjects are necessarily needed. This review will be of relevance to clinicians and researchers interested in understanding the underlying mechanisms in neurotrauma cases and the development of proper therapies as well as those with a general interest in the neurotrauma field.

Traumatic brain injury: progress and challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has the highest incidence of all common neurological disorders, and poses a substantial public health burden. TBI is increasingly documented not only as an acute condition but also as a chronic disease with long-term consequences, including an increased risk of late-onset neurodegeneration. The first Lancet Neurology Commission on TBI, published in 2017, called for a concerted effort to tackle the global health problem posed by TBI. Since then, funding agencies have supported research both in high-income countries (HICs) and in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). In November 2020, the World Health Assembly, the decision-making body of WHO, passed resolution WHA73.10 for global actions on epilepsy and other neurological disorders, and WHO launched the Decade for Action on Road Safety plan in 2021. New knowledge has been generated by large observational studies, including those conducted under the umbrella of the International Traumatic Brain Injury Research (InTBIR) initiative, established as a collaboration of funding agencies in 2011. InTBIR has also provided a huge stimulus to collaborative research in TBI and has facilitated participation of global partners. The return on investment has been high, but many needs of patients with TBI remain unaddressed. This update to the 2017 Commission presents advances and discusses persisting and new challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research.

In LMICs, the occurrence of TBI is driven by road traffic incidents, often involving vulnerable road users such as motorcyclists and pedestrians. In HICs, most TBI is caused by falls, particularly in older people (aged ≥65 years), who often have comorbidities. Risk factors such as frailty and alcohol misuse provide opportunities for targeted prevention actions. Little evidence exists to inform treatment of older patients, who have been commonly excluded from past clinical trials—consequently, appropriate evidence is urgently required. Although increasing age is associated with worse outcomes from TBI, age should not dictate limitations in therapy. However, patients injured by low-energy falls (who are mostly older people) are about 50% less likely to receive critical care or emergency interventions, compared with those injured by high-energy mechanisms, such as road traffic incidents.

Mild TBI, defined as a Glasgow Coma sum score of 13–15, comprises most of the TBI cases (over 90%) presenting to hospital. Around 50% of adult patients with mild TBI presenting to hospital do not recover to pre-TBI levels of health by 6 months after their injury. Fewer than 10% of patients discharged after presenting to an emergency department for TBI in Europe currently receive follow-up. Structured follow-up after mild TBI should be considered good practice, and urgent research is needed to identify which patients with mild TBI are at risk for incomplete recovery.

The selection of patients for CT is an important triage decision in mild TBI since it allows early identification of lesions that can trigger hospital admission or life-saving surgery. Current decision making for deciding on CT is inefficient, with 90–95% of scanned patients showing no intracranial injury but being subjected to radiation risks. InTBIR studies have shown that measurement of blood-based biomarkers adds value to previously proposed clinical decision rules, holding the potential to improve efficiency while reducing radiation exposure. Increased concentrations of biomarkers in the blood of patients with a normal presentation CT scan suggest structural brain damage, which is seen on MR scanning in up to 30% of patients with mild TBI. Advanced MRI, including diffusion tensor imaging and volumetric analyses, can identify additional injuries not detectable by visual inspection of standard clinical MR images. Thus, the absence of CT abnormalities does not exclude structural damage—an observation relevant to litigation procedures, to management of mild TBI, and when CT scans are insufficient to explain the severity of the clinical condition.

Although blood-based protein biomarkers have been shown to have important roles in the evaluation of TBI, most available assays are for research use only. To date, there is only one vendor of such assays with regulatory clearance in Europe and the USA with an indication to rule out the need for CT imaging for patients with suspected TBI. Regulatory clearance is provided for a combination of biomarkers, although evidence is accumulating that a single biomarker can perform as well as a combination. Additional biomarkers and more clinical-use platforms are on the horizon, but cross-platform harmonisation of results is needed. Health-care efficiency would benefit from diversity in providers.

In the intensive care setting, automated analysis of blood pressure and intracranial pressure with calculation of derived parameters can help individualise management of TBI. Interest in the identification of subgroups of patients who might benefit more from some specific therapeutic approaches than others represents a welcome shift towards precision medicine. Comparative-effectiveness research to identify best practice has delivered on expectations for providing evidence in support of best practices, both in adult and paediatric patients with TBI.

Progress has also been made in improving outcome assessment after TBI. Key instruments have been translated into up to 20 languages and linguistically validated, and are now internationally available for clinical and research use. TBI affects multiple domains of functioning, and outcomes are affected by personal characteristics and life-course events, consistent with a multifactorial bio-psycho-socio-ecological model of TBI, as presented in the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) 2022 report. Multidimensional assessment is desirable and might be best based on measurement of global functional impairment. More work is required to develop and implement recommendations for multidimensional assessment. Prediction of outcome is relevant to patients and their families, and can facilitate the benchmarking of quality of care. InTBIR studies have identified new building blocks (eg, blood biomarkers and quantitative CT analysis) to refine existing prognostic models. Further improvement in prognostication could come from MRI, genetics, and the integration of dynamic changes in patient status after presentation.

Neurotrauma researchers traditionally seek translation of their research findings through publications, clinical guidelines, and industry collaborations. However, to effectively impact clinical care and outcome, interactions are also needed with research funders, regulators, and policy makers, and partnership with patient organisations. Such interactions are increasingly taking place, with exemplars including interactions with the All Party Parliamentary Group on Acquired Brain Injury in the UK, the production of the NASEM report in the USA, and interactions with the US Food and Drug Administration. More interactions should be encouraged, and future discussions with regulators should include debates around consent from patients with acute mental incapacity and data sharing. Data sharing is strongly advocated by funding agencies. From January 2023, the US National Institutes of Health will require upload of research data into public repositories, but the EU requires data controllers to safeguard data security and privacy regulation. The tension between open data-sharing and adherence to privacy regulation could be resolved by cross-dataset analyses on federated platforms, with the data remaining at their original safe location. Tools already exist for conventional statistical analyses on federated platforms, however federated machine learning requires further development. Support for further development of federated platforms, and neuroinformatics more generally, should be a priority.

This update to the 2017 Commission presents new insights and challenges across a range of topics around TBI: epidemiology and prevention (section 1 ); system of care (section 2 ); clinical management (section 3 ); characterisation of TBI (section 4 ); outcome assessment (section 5 ); prognosis (Section 6 ); and new directions for acquiring and implementing evidence (section 7 ). Table 1 summarises key messages from this Commission and proposes recommendations for the way forward to advance research and clinical management of TBI.

Neurotrauma clinicians’ perspectives on the contextual challenges associated with traumatic brain injury follow up in low-income and middle-income countries: A reflexive thematic analysis

Background

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major global health issue, but low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face the greatest burden. Significant differences in neurotrauma outcomes are recognised between LMICs and high-income countries. However, outcome data is not consistently nor reliably recorded in either setting, thus the true burden of TBI cannot be accurately quantified.

Objective

To explore the specific contextual challenges of, and possible solutions to improve, long-term follow-up following TBI in low-resource settings.

Methods

A cross-sectional, pragmatic qualitative study, that considered knowledge subjective and reality multiple (i.e. situated within the naturalistic paradigm). Data collection utilised semi-structured interviews, by videoconference and asynchronous e-mail. Data were analysed using Braun and Clarke’s six-stage Reflexive Thematic Analysis.

Results

18 neurosurgeons from 13 countries participated in this study, and data analysis gave rise to five themes: Clinical Context: What must we understand?; Perspectives and Definitions: What are we talking about?; Ownership and Beneficiaries: Why do we do it?; Lost to Follow-up: Who misses out and why?; Processes and Procedures: What do we do, or what might we do?

Conclusion

The collection of long-term outcome data plays an imperative role in reducing the global burden of neurotrauma. Therefore, this was an exploratory study that examined the contextual challenges associated with long-term follow-up in LMICs. Where technology can contribute to improved neurotrauma surveillance and remote assessment, these must be implemented in a manner that improves patient outcomes, reduces clinical burden on physicians, and does not surpass the comprehension, capabilities, or financial means of the end user. Future research is recommended to investigate patient and family perspectives, the impact on clinical care teams, and the full economic implications of new technologies for follow-up.

Neurotrauma Registries in Low- and Middle-Income Countries for Building Organized Neurotrauma Care: The LATINO Registry Experience Comment on "Neurotrauma Surveillance in National Registries of Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review and Comparative Analysis of Data Dictionaries"

Trauma registries play an important role in building capacity for trauma systems. Regularly, trauma registries exist in high-income countries (HICs) but not in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Neurotrauma includes common conditions, like traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) and spinal cord injuries. The development of organized neurotrauma care is crucial for improving the quality of care in less-resourced areas. The recent article published in International Journal of Health Policy and Management by Barthélemy et al entitled "Neurotrauma Surveillance in National Registries of Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review and Comparative Analysis of Data Dictionaries" adds an important body of literature to improve understanding of the importance of these types of efforts by promoting organized neurotrauma care systems in LMICs. Here, we provide a short commentary based on our experience with the Latin America and the Caribbean Neurotrauma Registry (LATINO-TBI) in the Latin America (LATAM) region.

Qualitative research methods in neurosurgery: an unexplored avenue

OBJECTIVE

Explore the value and potential of qualitative research to neurosurgery and provide insight and understanding to this underused methodology.

BACKGROUND

The definition of qualitative research is critically discussed and the heterogeneity within this field of inquiry explored. The value of qualitative research to the field of neurosurgery is articulated through its contribution to understanding complex clinical problems.

DISCUSSION

To resolve some of the misunderstanding of qualitative research, this paper discusses research design choices. We explore approaches that use qualitative techniques but are not, necessarily, situated within a qualitative paradigm in addition to how qualitative research philosophy aids researchers to conduct interpretive inquiry that can reveal more than simply what was said by participants. Common research designs associated with qualitative inquiry are introduced, and how complex analysis may contribute more in-depth insights is explained. Approaches to quality are discussed briefly to support improvements in qualitative methods and qualitative manuscripts. Finally, we consider the future of qualitative research in neurosurgery, and suggest how to move forward in the qualitative neurosurgical evidence base.

CONCLUSION

There is enormous potential for qualitative research to contribute to the advancement of person-centred care within neurosurgery. There are signs that more qualitative research is being conducted and that neurosurgical journals are increasingly open to this methodology. While studies that do not engage fully within the qualitative paradigm can make important contributions to the evidence base, due regard should be given to immersive inquiry within qualitative paradigms to allow complex, in-depth, investigations of the human experience.

Financial Risk Protection for Neurosurgical Care in Indonesia and the Philippines: A Primer on Health Financing for the Global Neurosurgeon

Which conditions treated by neurosurgeons cause the worst economic hardship in low middle-income in countries? How can public health financing be responsive to the inequities in the delivery of neurosurgical care? This review article frames the objectives of equity, quality, and efficiency in health financing to the goals of global neurosurgery. In order to glean provider perspectives on the affordability of neurosurgical care in low-resource settings, we did a survey of neurosurgeons from Indonesia and the Philippines and identified that the care of socioeconomically disadvantaged patients with malignant intracranial tumors were found to incur the highest out-of-pocket expenses. Additionally, the surveyed neurosurgeons also observed that treatment of traumatic brain injury may have to require greater financial subsidies. It is therefore imperative to frame health financing alongside the goals of equity, efficiency, and quality of neurosurgical care for the impoverished. Using principles and perspectives from managerial economics and public health, we conceptualize an implementation framework that addresses both the supply and demand sides of healthcare provision as applied to neurosurgery. For the supply side, strategic purchasing enables a systematic and contractual management of payment arrangements that provide performance-based economic incentives for providers. For the demand side, conditional cash transfers similarly leverages on financial incentives on the part of patients to reward certain health-seeking behaviors that significantly influence clinical outcomes. These health financing strategies are formulated in order to ultimately build neurosurgical capacity in LMICs, improve access to care for patients, and ensure financial risk protection.