Prognostic Value of Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein in Patients With Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Biomarkers have been suggested as potential prognostic predictors following a moderate or severe traumatic brain injury but their prognostic accuracy is still uncertain. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the ability of the glial fibrillary acidic protein to predict prognosis in patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and BIOSIS electronic databases and conference abstracts, bibliographies of selected studies, and narrative reviews were searched. STUDY SELECTION: Pairs of reviewers identified eligible studies. Cohort studies including greater than or equal to four patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury and reporting glial fibrillary acidic protein levels according to the outcomes of interest, namely Glasgow Outcome Scale or Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale, and mortality, were eligible. DATA EXTRACTION: Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data from the selected studies using a standardized case report form. Mean levels were log-transformed, and their differences were pooled with random effect models. Results are presented as geometric mean ratios. Methodologic quality, risk of bias, and applicability concerns of the included studies were assessed. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven-thousand seven-hundred sixty-five citations were retrieved of which 15 studies were included in the systematic review (n = 1,070), and nine were included in the meta-analysis (n = 701). We found significant associations between glial fibrillary acidic protein serum levels and Glasgow Outcome Scale score less than or equal to 3 or Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale score less than or equal to 4 (six studies: geometric mean ratio 4.98 [95% CI, 2.19-11.13]; I = 94%) and between mortality (seven studies: geometric mean ratio 8.13 [95% CI, 3.89-17.00]; I = 99%). CONCLUSIONS: Serum glial fibrillary acidic protein levels were significantly higher in patients with an unfavorable prognosis. Glial fibrillary acidic protein has a potential for clinical bedside use in helping for prognostic assessment. Further research should focus on multimodal approaches including tissue biomarkers for prognostic evaluation in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury.

Red blood cell transfusion in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury: an international survey of physicians' attitudes.

INTRODUCTION: Restrictive transfusion strategies have been advocated in critically ill patients. Nevertheless, considerable uncertainty exists regarding optimal transfusion thresholds in traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients because the injured brain is susceptible to hypoxemic damage. We aimed to identify the determinants of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion and the perceived optimal transfusion thresholds in adult patients with moderate-to-severe TBI. METHODS: We conducted an electronic, self-administered survey targeting critical care specialists and neurosurgeons from Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom caring for TBI patients. The questionnaire was initially developed by a panel of experts using a structured process (domains/items generation and reduction). The questionnaire was validated for clinical sensibility, reliability, and content. RESULTS: The response rate was 28.7% (218/760). When presented with the hypothetical scenario of a young adult TBI patient, a wide range of transfusion practices was observed, with 47 (95% confidence interval [CI], 41 to 54)% favouring RBC transfusion at a hemoglobin level of ≤ 70 g·L-1 in the acute phase of care, while 73 (95% CI, 67 to 79)% would use this trigger in the plateau phase of care. Multiple trauma, neuro-monitoring data, hemorrhagic shock, and planned surgery were the main factors that influenced the need for transfusion. The lack of clinical evidence and guidelines was responsible for uncertainty regarding RBC transfusion strategies in this patient population. CONCLUSION: In our survey about critically ill TBI patients, transfusion practice was found to be mainly influenced by the acuity of care, patient characteristics, and neuro-monitoring. Clinical equipoise regarding optimal transfusion strategy is believed to be mainly attributed to the lack of clear clinical evidence and guidelines. Appropriate randomized-controlled trials are required to determine the optimal transfusion strategies in TBI patients.

Incidence and impact of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in clinical trials of severe traumatic brain injury: A systematic review.

Background Most deaths following severe traumatic brain injury follow decisions to withdraw life-sustaining therapies. However, the incidence of the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies and its potential impact on research data interpretation have been poorly characterized. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the reporting and the impact of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in randomized clinical trials of patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Methods We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, BIOSIS, and CINAHL databases and references of included trials. All randomized controlled trials published between January 2002 and August 2015 in the six highest impact journals in general medicine, critical care medicine, and neurocritical care (total of 18 journals) were considered for eligibility. Randomized controlled trials were included if they enrolled adult patients with severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale ≤ 8) and reported data on mortality. Our primary objective was to assess the proportion of trials reporting the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in a publication. Our secondary objectives were to describe the overall mortality rate, the proportion of deaths following the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies, and to assess the impact of the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies on trial results. Results From 5987 citations retrieved, we included 41 randomized trials (n = 16,364, ranging from 11 to 10,008 patients). Overall mortality was 23% (range = 3%-57%). Withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies was reported in 20% of trials (8/41, 932 patients in trials) and the crude number of deaths due to the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies was reported in 17% of trials (7/41, 884 patients in trials). In these trials, 63% of deaths were associated with the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies (105/168). An analysis carried out by imputing a 4% differential rate in instances of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies between study groups yielded different results and conclusions in one third of the trials. Conclusion Data on the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies are incompletely reported in randomized controlled trials of patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Given the high proportion of deaths due to the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in severe traumatic brain injury patients, and the potential of this medical decision to influence the results of clinical trials, instances of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies should be systematically reported in clinical trials in this group of patients.

Intensity of care and withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in severe traumatic brain injury patients: a post-hoc analysis of a multicentre retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: The intensity of care provided to critically ill patients has been shown to be associated with mortality. In patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), specialized neurocritical care is often required, but whether it affects clinically significant outcomes is unknown. We aimed to determine the association of the intensity of care on mortality and the incidence of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in critically ill patients with severe TBI. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of a multicentre retrospective cohort study of critically ill adult patients with severe TBI. We defined the intensity of care as a daily cumulative sum of interventions during the intensive care unit stay. Our outcome measures were all-cause hospital mortality and the incidence of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies. RESULTS: Seven hundred sixteen severe TBI patients were included in our study. Most were male (77%) with a mean (standard deviation) age of 42 (20.5) yr and a median [interquartile range] Glasgow Coma Scale score of 3 [3-6]. Our results showed an association between the intensity of care and mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.74) and the incidence of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.79). CONCLUSION: In general, more intense care was associated with fewer deaths and a lower incidence of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in critically ill patients with severe TBI.

The Prognostic Value of MRI in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Traumatic brain injury is a major cause of death and disability, yet many predictors of outcome are not precise enough to guide initial clinical decision-making. Although increasingly used in the early phase following traumatic brain injury, the prognostic utility of MRI remains uncertain. We thus undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating the predictive value of acute MRI lesion patterns for discriminating clinical outcome in traumatic brain injury. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and CENTRAL from inception to November 2015. STUDY SELECTION: Studies of adults who had MRI in the acute phase following moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and the Glasgow Outcome Scale. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently performed study selection and data extraction. We calculated pooled effect estimates with a random effects model, evaluated the risk of bias using a modified version of Quality in Prognostic Studies and determined the strength of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 58 eligible studies, of which 27 (n = 1,652) contributed data to meta-analysis. Brainstem lesions were associated with all-cause mortality (risk ratio, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.01-3.15; I = 43%) and unfavorable Glasgow Outcome Scale (risk ratio, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.72-3.58; I = 81%) at greater than or equal to 6 months. Diffuse axonal injury patterns were associated with an increased risk of unfavorable Glasgow Outcome Scale (risk ratio, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.06-5.69; I = 74%). MRI scores based on lesion depth demonstrated increasing risk of unfavorable neurologic outcome as more caudal structures were affected. Most studies were at high risk of methodological bias. CONCLUSIONS: MRI following traumatic brain injury yields important prognostic information, with several lesion patterns significantly associated with long-term survival and neurologic outcome. Given the high risk of bias in the current body of literature, large well-controlled studies are necessary to better quantify the prognostic role of early MRI in moderate and severe traumatic brain injury.

Clinical outcomes, predictors, and prevalence of anterior pituitary disorders following traumatic brain injury: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical outcomes, predictors, and prevalence of anterior pituitary disorders following traumatic brain injury. DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Registry, BIOSIS, and Trip Database up to February 2012 and consulted bibliographies of narrative reviews and selected articles. STUDY SELECTION: We included cohort, case-control, cross-sectional studies and randomized trials enrolling at least five adults with blunt traumatic brain injury in whom at least one anterior pituitary axis was assessed. We excluded case series and studies in which other neurological conditions were indistinguishable from traumatic brain injury. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers selected citations, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using a standardized form. DATA SYNTHESIS: We performed meta-analyses using random effect models and assessed heterogeneity using the I index. RESULTS: We included 66 studies (5,386 patients) evaluating prevalence, 14 evaluating clinical outcomes, and 27 evaluating predictors. Thirty studies were at low risk of bias. Anterior pituitary disorders were associated with a trend toward increased ICU mortality (risk ratio, 1.79; 95% CI, 0.99-3.21; four studies) and no difference in Glasgow Outcome Scale score (mean difference, -0.45; 95% CI, -1.10 to 0.20; three studies). Age (mean difference, 3.19; 95% CI, 0.31-6.08; 19 studies), traumatic brain injury severity (risk ratio, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.20-3.86 for patients with severe vs nonsevere traumatic brain injury; seven studies), and skull fractures (risk ratio, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.03-2.91; six studies) predicted anterior pituitary disorders. Over the long term, 31.6% (95% CI, 23.6-40.1%; 27 studies) of patients had at least one anterior pituitary disorder. We observed significant heterogeneity that was not solely explained by the risk of bias or traumatic brain injury severity. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one third of traumatic brain injury patients have persistent anterior pituitary disorder. Older age, traumatic brain injury severity, and skull fractures predict anterior pituitary disorders, which in turn may be associated with higher ICU mortality. Further high-quality studies are warranted to better define the burden of anterior pituitary disorders and to identify high-risk patients.

Impact of trauma system structure on injury outcomes: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Injury represents one of the greatest public health challenges of our time with over 5 million deaths and 100 million people temporarily or permanently disabled every year worldwide. The effectiveness of trauma systems in decreasing injury mortality and morbidity has been well demonstrated. However, the organisation of trauma care varies significantly across trauma systems and we know little about which components of trauma systems contribute to their effectiveness. The objective of the study described in this protocol is to systematically review evidence of the impact of trauma system components on clinically significant outcomes including mortality, function and disability, quality of life, and resource utilization. METHODS: We will perform a systematic review of studies evaluating the association between at least one trauma system component (e.g. accreditation by a central agency, interfacility transfer agreements) and at least one injury outcome (e.g. mortality, disability, resource use). We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE central, and BIOSIS/Web of Knowledge databases, thesis holdings, key injury organisation websites and conference proceedings for eligible studies. Pairs of independent reviewers will evaluate studies for eligibility and extract data from included articles. Methodological quality will be evaluated using elements of the ROBINS-I tool and the Cochrane risk of bias tool for non-randomized and randomized studies, respectively. Strength of evidence will be evaluated using the GRADE tool. DISCUSSION: We expect to advance knowledge on the components of trauma systems that contribute to their effectiveness. This may lead to recommendations on trauma system structure that will help policy-makers make informed decisions as to where resources should be focused. The review may also lead to specific recommendations for future research efforts. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 28-06-2016. PROSPERO 2016:CRD42016041336 Available from http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42016041336 .

Prognostication in critically ill patients with severe traumatic brain injury: the TBI-Prognosis multicentre feasibility study.

OBJECTIVE: Severe traumatic brain injury is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in young adults. Assessing long-term neurological outcome after such injury is difficult and often characterised by uncertainty. The objective of this feasibility study was to establish the feasibility of conducting a large, multicentre prospective study to develop a prognostic model of long-term neurological outcome in critically ill patients with severe traumatic brain injury. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: 9 Canadian intensive care units enrolled patients suffering from acute severe traumatic brain injury. Clinical, biological, radiological and electrophysiological data were systematically collected during the first week in the intensive care unit. Mortality and functional outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale extended) were assessed on hospital discharge, and then 3, 6 and 12 months following injury. OUTCOMES: The compliance to protocolised test procedures was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were enrolment rate and compliance to follow-up. RESULTS: We successfully enrolled 50 patients over a 12-month period. Most patients were male (80%), with a median age of 45 years (IQR 29.0-60.0), a median Injury Severity Score of 38 (IQR 25-50) and a Glasgow Coma Scale of 6 (IQR 3-7). Mortality was 38% (19/50) and most deaths occurred following a decision to withdraw life-sustaining therapies (18/19). The main reasons for non-enrolment were the time window for inclusion being after regular working hours (35%, n=23) and oversight (24%, n=16). Compliance with protocolised test procedures ranged from 92% to 100% and enrolment rate was 43%. No patients were lost to follow-up at 6 months and 2 were at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicentre prospective feasibility study, we achieved feasibility objectives pertaining to compliance to test, enrolment and follow-up. We conclude that the TBI-Prognosis prospective multicentre study in severe traumatic brain injury patients in Canada is feasible.

Red Blood Cell Transfusion in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Our objectives were to evaluate the frequency of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) as well as potential determinants and outcomes associated with RBC transfusion in this population. We conducted a systematic review of cohort studies and randomized trials of patients with TBI. We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and BIOSIS databases from their inception up to April 2015. We selected studies of adult patients with acute TBI reporting data on RBC transfusions. Cumulative incidences of transfusion were pooled using random-effect models with a DerSimonian approach. To evaluate the association between RBC transfusion and potential determinants or clinical outcomes, we pooled risk ratios or mean differences with random-effect models and the Mantel-Haenszel method. We identified 24 eligible studies (17414 patients). After pooling data from 23 studies (7524 patients), approximately 36% (95% confidence interval [CI], 28-44; I(2) = 98%) of patients received RBC transfusion at some point during their hospital stay. Hemoglobin thresholds for transfusion were rarely available (reported in 9 studies) and varied from 6 to 10 g/dL. Glasgow Coma Scale scores at admission were lower in patients who were transfused than those who were not (3 cohort studies; 1371 patients; mean difference of 1.38 points [95% CI, 0.86-1.89]; I(2) = 12%). Mortality was not significantly different among transfused and nontransfused patients in univariate and multivariate meta-analyses. Hospital length of stay was longer among patients receiving RBC transfusion compared to those who did not (3 studies; n = 455; mean difference, 9.58 days [95% CI, 3.94-15.22]; I(2) = 74%). Results should be considered cautiously due to the high heterogeneity and high risk of confounding from the observational nature of included studies. Red blood cell transfusion is frequent in patients with TBI, and transfusion practices varied widely between studies. Current published data highlight the lack of clinical evidence guiding transfusion strategies in TBI.

The prognostic value of magnetic resonance imaging in moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a devastating condition with significant long-term mortality and morbidity. Despite current need for objective indicators to guide initial decision-making, few reliable acute phase prognostic factors have been identified. Early magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been investigated as a prognostic tool, but uncertainty remains in both its discriminative predictive value and which acute phase lesion patterns correlate with long-term outcome. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review of observational cohort studies and randomized controlled trials of adult moderate or severe TBI patients who underwent MRI in the acute phase after trauma. A high sensitivity search strategy will be employed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and Cochrane CENTRAL to identify citations. Two reviewers will independently screen all identified references for eligibility and extract data into a standardized form. Data will be collected on study design, baseline demographics, trauma characteristics, magnetic resonance (MR) technical specifications, lesion patterns, and outcomes as related to acute MRI imaging. If meta-analysis is possible, quantitative data for each outcome will be pooled per type of lesion pattern using random effects models and expressed as Mantel-Haenszel relative risks in order to determine the prognostic value of lesions detected on acute MRI and their strength as discriminatory predictors of long-term outcome. Statistical heterogeneity will be evaluated with the I (2) statistics, and risk of bias and reporting quality will be assessed with standardized scales. Subgroup analyses are planned as a function of TBI severity, MRI-timing post-TBI, MRI field strength, MRI sequence, timing of outcome assessment, and risk of bias. DISCUSSION: We expect significant clinical heterogeneity, as eligible studies will likely encompass different periods in evolving MRI technology in addition to significant variability of image sequence protocols and timing of acquisition between centers. Based on existing studies in TBI, we expect lesions detected in the brainstem to be of significant predictive value as MRI is particularly sensitive for imaging the brain's posterior fossa. Our systematic review will allow clinicians to more accurately interpret MRI in the context of determining prognosis for moderate and severe TBI patients and inform researchers in this domain to improve the methodology of future studies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD42015017074.

Predictive value of neuron-specific enolase for prognosis in patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prognosis is difficult to establish early after moderate or severe traumatic brain injury despite representing an important concern for patients, families and medical teams. Biomarkers, such as neuron-specific enolase, have been proposed as potential early prognostic indicators. Our objective was to determine the association between neuron-specific enolase and clinical outcomes, and the prognostic value of neuron-specific enolase after a moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library and Biosis Previews, and reviewed reference lists of eligible articles to identify studies. We included cohort studies and randomized controlled trials that evaluated the prognostic value of neuron-specific enolase to predict mortality or Glasgow Outcome Scale score in patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. Two reviewers independently collected data. The pooled mean differences were analyzed using random-effects models. We assessed risk of bias using a customized Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed based on a priori hypotheses. RESULTS: We screened 5026 citations from which 30 studies (involving 1321 participants) met our eligibility criteria. We found a significant positive association between neuron-specific enolase serum levels and mortality (10 studies, n = 474; mean difference [MD] 18.46 µg/L, 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.81 to 26.11 µg/L; I2 = 83%) and a Glasgow Outcome Scale ≤ 3 (14 studies, n = 603; MD 17.25 µg/L, 95% CI 11.42 to 23.07 µg/L; I2 = 82%). We were unable to determine a clinical threshold value using the available patient data. INTERPRETATION: In patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury, increased neuron-specific enolase serum levels are associated with unfavourable outcomes. The optimal neuron-specific enolase threshold value to predict unfavourable prognosis remains unknown and clinical decision-making is currently not recommended until additional studies are made available.

Intermittent vs Continuous Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Androgen deprivation is the standard therapy for patients with advanced or recurrent prostate cancer. However, this treatment causes adverse effects, alters quality of life, and may lead to castration-resistant disease. Intermittent androgen deprivation has been studied as an alternative. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and tolerability of intermittent vs continuous androgen deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer. DATA SOURCES: We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Biosis, National Technical Information Service, OpenSIGLE, and Google Scholar from inception of each database through March 2014. References from published guidelines, reviews, and other relevant articles were also considered. STUDY SELECTION: We selected randomized clinical trials comparing intermittent vs continuous androgen deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers performed study selection, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) with the inverse variance method and risk ratios with the Mantel-Haenszel method, using random effect models. A noninferiority analysis was conducted for overall survival with a margin of 1.15 for the upper boundary of the HR. We assessed heterogeneity using the I2 index. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcomes were overall survival and quality of life. Secondary outcomes were cancer-specific survival, progression-free survival, time to castration resistance, skeletal-related events, and adverse effects. RESULTS: From 10 510 references, we included 22 articles from 15 trials (6856 patients) published between 2000 and 2013. All but 1 study had an unclear or high risk of bias. We observed no significant difference between intermittent and continuous therapy for overall survival (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.93-1.11; 8 trials, 5352 patients), cancer-specific survival (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87-1.19; 5 trials, 3613 patients), and progression-free survival (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.84-1.05; 4 trials, 1774 patients). There was minimal difference in patients' self-reported quality of life between the 2 interventions. Most trials observed an improvement in physical and sexual functioning with intermittent therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Intermittent androgen deprivation was not inferior to continuous therapy with respect to the overall survival. Some quality-of-life criteria seemed improved with intermittent therapy. Intermittent androgen deprivation can be considered as an alternative option in patients with recurrent or metastatic prostate cancer.

Trauma center performance evaluation based on costs: a systematic review of cohort studies.

BACKGROUND: In 2000, more than 50 million Americans were treated in hospitals following injury, with costs estimated at $80 billion, yet no performance indicator based on costs has been developed and validated specifically for acute trauma care. This study aimed to describe how data on costs have been used to evaluate the performance of acute trauma care hospitals. METHODS: A systematic review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, TRIP, and ProQuest was performed in December 2012. Cohort studies evaluating hospital performance for the treatment of injury inpatients in terms of costs were considered eligible. Two authors conducted the screening and the data abstraction independently using a piloted electronic data abstraction form. Methodological quality was evaluated using seven criteria from the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement and the Downs and Black tool. RESULTS: The search retrieved 6,635 studies, of which 10 were eligible for inclusion. Nine studies were conducted in the United States and one in Europe. Six studies used patient charges as a proxy for patient costs, of which four used cost-to-charge ratios. One study estimated costs using average unit costs, and three studies were based on the real costs obtained from a hospital accounting system. Average costs per patient in 2013 US dollar varied between 2,568 and 74,435. Four studies (40%) were considered to be of good methodological quality. CONCLUSION: Studies evaluating the performance of trauma hospitals in terms of costs are rare. Most are based on charges rather than costs, and they have low methodological quality. Further research is needed to develop and validate a performance indicator based on inpatient costs that will enable us to monitor trauma centers in terms of resource use. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review, evidence, level III.

Red blood cell transfusion in patients with traumatic brain injury: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Anemia is a prevalent condition in critically ill patients and red blood cell transfusions are frequent. Although transfusions at low hemoglobin levels have been shown to be associated with equivalent or better outcomes than higher hemoglobin thresholds, clinical equipoise persists in patients with traumatic brain injury considering their susceptibility to secondary cerebral insults such as those from hypoxemia. METHODS: Our objectives are to estimate the frequency of red blood cell transfusion in patients with traumatic brain injury and to evaluate transfusion thresholds, determinants and outcomes associated with transfusion strategies.We will conduct a systematic review of cohort studies and randomized controlled trials of patients with traumatic brain injury. We will search MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS and the Cochrane Library for eligible studies. Two independent reviewers will screen all identified references. Studies including adult patients with traumatic brain injury reporting data on red blood cell transfusions will be eligible. We will collect data on baseline demographics, trauma characteristics, hemoglobin thresholds, blood transfusions and clinical outcomes (mortality, length of stay, complications, and so on). Two independent reviewers will extract data using a standardized form. We will pool cumulative incidences using DerSimonian and Lair random-effect models after a Freeman-Tukey transformation to stabilize variances. We will pool risk ratios or mean differences with random-effect models and Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance methods in order to evaluate the association between red blood cell transfusion and potential determinants or outcomes. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis according to timing of red blood cell transfusion, traumatic brain injury severity, year of conduction of the study, risk of bias, notably, are planned. DISCUSSION: We expect to observe high heterogeneity in the proportion of transfused patients across studies and that the global proportion will be similar to the frequency observed in the general medical critically ill population. Our systematic review will allow us to better describe and understand current transfusion practices in patients with traumatic brain injury, a clinical population in which liberal transfusions are still advocated in the absence of evidence-based data. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION PROSPERO: CRD42014007402.

Complications to evaluate adult trauma care: An expert consensus study.

BACKGROUND: Complications affect up to 37% of patients hospitalized for injury and increase mortality, morbidity, and costs. One of the keys to controlling complications for injury admissions is to monitor in-hospital complication rates. However, there is no consensus on which complications should be used to evaluate the quality of trauma care. The objective of this study was to develop a consensus-based list of complications that can be used to assess the acute phase of adult trauma care. METHODS: We used a three-round Web-based Delphi survey among experts in the field of trauma care quality with a broad range of clinical expertise and geographic diversity. The main outcome measure was median importance rating on a 5-point Likert scale (very low to very high); complications with a median of 4 or greater and no disagreement were retained. A secondary measure was the perceived quality of information on each complication available in patient files. RESULTS: Of 19 experts invited to participate, 17 completed the first (brainstorming) round and 16 (84%) completed all rounds. Of 73 complications generated in Round 1, a total of 25 were retained including adult respiratory distress syndrome, hospital-acquired pneumonia, sepsis, acute renal failure, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, wound infection, decubitus ulcers, and delirium. Of these, 19 (76%) were perceived to have high-quality or very high-quality information in patient files by more than 50% of the panel members. CONCLUSION: This study proposes a consensus-based list of 25 complications that can be used to evaluate the quality of acute adult trauma care. These complications can be used to develop an informative and actionable quality indicator to evaluate trauma care with the goal of decreasing rates of hospital complications and thus improving patient outcomes and resource use. DRG International Classification of Diseases codes are provided.

Can shared decision making increase the uptake of evidence in clinical practice?

Despite copious research and clear policies in many healthcare systems, evidence based practice has yet to be widely adopted. Part of the problem is insufficient consideration of the patient-clinician consultation, which lies at the heart of clinical practice and is where most decisions are made. Shared decision making (SDM)-the interactive process in which patients and clinicians decide on healthcare together-capitalises on the consultation to better translate the best evidence into clinical decisions while taking the patient's values and preferences into account. This paper takes stock of interventions that seek to embed SDM in clinical practice, such as patient decision aids that target both patients and clinicians. It also presents challenges that remain: among others, the paucity of evidence on effective implementation strategies and the lack of consideration of how SDM works when care is delivered by interprofessional teams. The paper then reviews current initiatives to improve and disseminate SDM across the healthcare continuum, and discusses why SDM should be encouraged as a means to leverage evidence based practice. The evidence suggests that finding ways to overcome the challenges and promote SDM will accelerate the uptake of evidence in gastroenterology and hepatology clinical practice.