Depression in Individuals With Traumatic and Nontraumatic Spinal Cord Injury Living in the Community.

OBJECTIVE: To assess depression in a sample of individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) living in the community, and to determine the prevalence of probable major depressive disorder (PMDD) among those with traumatic spinal cord injury (T-SCI) and those with nontraumatic spinal cord injury (NT-SCI). DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Data were collected on individuals with SCI now living in the community, who completed a comprehensive follow-up assessment at the hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals with T-SCI or NT-SCI (N=831) completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and were included. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The PHQ-9 was used to detect the presence of PMDD and to measure the severity of the depression. RESULTS: The most frequent etiology of SCI was T-SCI (66.9%). Overall, 16.2% of participants met the criteria for PMDD; however, a higher prevalence was noted for individuals with NT-SCI (21.1%) than for individuals with T-SCI (13.8%). Risk factors between T-SCI and NT-SCI did not differ greatly. Female sex, chronic pain, and lower levels of/difficulties in participation were associated with the presence of PMDD. CONCLUSIONS: PMDD appears to occur at a higher rate in individuals with NT-SCI, with greater symptom severity. The finding that problems with participation are directly associated with depression raises the need for specific treatment goals, with the aim of empowering individuals with SCI to reintegrate into the community. Potential stress factors (eg, environmental barriers, limited participation options) should be addressed accordingly.

[What happens after the accident? Psychosocial needs of people with traumatic brain injury and their families]. / ¿Y después del accidente? Las necesidades psicosociales de las personas con traumatismo craneoencefálico y de sus familiares.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that people with a traumatic brain injury and their families perceived as helping to improve their quality of life. METHODS: Three focus groups and five interviews were conducted with a total of 37 participants: 14 persons with traumatic brain injury and 23 caregivers. A content analysis was conducted. The constant comparative method was applied. RESULTS: We detected five factors that improved the quality of life of persons with a traumatic brain and their families: 1) Informal support (family and friends); 2) formal support (counseling, employment, built and bureaucratic environment); 3) type of clinical characteristics; 4) social participation, and 5) social visibility. CONCLUSIONS: The needs expressed by our participants primarily focused on social and emotional factors. For persons with severe traumatic brain injury attempting to achieve the best possible community integration, a new semiology is required, not limited to medical care, but also involving social and psychological care tailored to the needs of each individual and family and their environment.

Monitoring and Prognosis System Based on the ICF for People with Traumatic Brain Injury.

The objective of this research is to provide a standardized platform to monitor and predict indicators of people with traumatic brain injury using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, and analyze its potential benefits for people with disabilities, health centers and administrations. We developed a platform that allows automatic standardization and automatic graphical representations of indicators of the status of individuals and populations. We used data from 730 people with acquired brain injury performing periodic comprehensive evaluations in the years 2006-2013. Health professionals noted that the use of color-coded graphical representation is useful for quickly diagnose failures, limitations or restrictions in rehabilitation. The prognosis system achieves 41% of accuracy and sensitivity in the prediction of emotional functions, and 48% of accuracy and sensitivity in the prediction of executive functions. This monitoring and prognosis system has the potential to: (1) save costs and time, (2) provide more information to make decisions, (3) promote interoperability, (4) facilitate joint decision-making, and (5) improve policies of socioeconomic evaluation of the burden of disease. Professionals found the monitoring system useful because it generates a more comprehensive understanding of health oriented to the profile of the patients, instead of their diseases and injuries.