Clinical Epidemiology of Extracranial Injuries in Severe Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury in South America.

BACKGROUND: Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of pediatric mortality, with a disproportionate burden on low- and middle-income countries. The impact of concomitant extracranial injury (ECI) on these patients remains unclear. This study is the first to characterize the epidemiology and clinical course of severe pediatric TBI with extracranial injuries in any South American country. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of baseline data collected prior to implementation of a clinical trial on TBI care in Argentina, Paraguay, and Chile from September 2019 to July 2020. Patients ≤18 years with CT evidence of TBI, and a Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score ≤8 were recruited. Patients were initially stratified by highest non-head abbreviated injury scale (AIS): isolated TBI (AIS=0), minor extracranial injury (MEI; AIS=1-2), and serious extracranial injury (SEI; AIS≥3). Patients were subsequently stratified by mechanism of injury. Intergroup differences were compared using ANOVA, two-tailed unpaired t-tests, and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Among the 116 children included, 33 % (n = 38) had an isolated TBI, 34 % (n = 39) had MEI, and 34 % (n = 39) had SEI. Facial (n = 53), thoracic (n = 44), and abdominal (n = 31) injuries were the most common ECIs. At discharge, there were no significant differences in median GCS, GOS, or GOS-extended between groups. Patients with SEI had a longer hospital LOS than those with isolated TBI (median 28.0 (IQR 10.6-40.1) vs 11.9 (IQR 8.7-20.7) days, p = 0.013). The most common mechanisms of injury were road traffic injuries (RTIs) (n = 50, 43 %) and falls (n = 35, 30 %). Patients with RTI-associated TBIs were more likely to be older (median 11.0 (IQR 3.0-14.0) vs 2.0 (IQR 0.8-7.0) years, p<0.001) and more likely to have an ECI (86% vs 54 %, respectively; p = 0.003). ICU and Hospital LOS for RTI patients (median 10.5 (IQR 6.1-21.1) and 24.1 (IQR 11.5-40.4) days) were longer than those of fall patients (median 6.1 (IQR 2.6-8.9) and 13.7 (IQR 7.7-24.5) days). CONCLUSIONS: Extracranial injuries are common in South American patients with severe TBI. Severe ECI is more frequently associated with RTIs and can result in a higher rate of surgical procedures and LOS. Further strategies are needed to characterize the prevention and treatment of severe pediatric TBI in the South American context.

Development of a Randomized Trial Comparing ICP-Monitor-Based Management of Severe Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury to Management Based on Imaging and Clinical Examination Without ICP Monitoring-Study Protocol.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major global public health problem. It is a leading cause of death and disability in children and adolescents worldwide. Although increased intracranial pressure (ICP) is common and associated with death and poor outcome after pediatric TBI, the efficacy of current ICP-based management remains controversial. We intend to provide Class I evidence testing the efficacy of a protocol based on current ICP monitor-based management vs care based on imaging and clinical examination without ICP monitoring in pediatric severe TBI. METHODS: A phase III, multicenter, parallel-group, randomized superiority trial performed in intensive care units in Central and South America to determine the impact on 6-month outcome of children aged 1-12 years with severe TBI (age-appropriate Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤8) randomized to ICP-based or non-ICP-based management. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: Primary outcome is 6-month Pediatric Quality of Life. Secondary outcomes are 3-month Pediatric Quality of Life, mortality, 3-month and 6-month Pediatric extended Glasgow Outcome Score, intensive care unit length of stay, and number of interventions focused on treating measured or suspected intracranial hypertension. DISCUSSION: This is not a study of the value of knowing the ICP in sTBI. This research question is protocol-based. We are investigating the added value of protocolized ICP management to treatment based on imaging and clinical examination in the global population of severe pediatric TBI. Demonstrating efficacy should standardize ICP monitoring in severe pediatric TBI. Alternate results should prompt reassessment of how and in which patients ICP data should be applied in neurotrauma care.

Development of a Randomized Trial Comparing ICP-Monitor-Based Management of Severe Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury to Management Based on Imaging and Clinical Examination Without ICP Monitoring-Research Algorithms.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The efficacy of our current approach to incorporating intracranial pressure (ICP) data into pediatric severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) management is incompletely understood, lacking data from multicenter, prospective, randomized studies. The National Institutes of Health-supported Benchmark Evidence from Latin America-Treatment of Raised Intracranial Pressure-Pediatrics trial will compare outcomes from pediatric sTBI of a management protocol based on ICP monitoring vs 1 based on imaging and clinical examination without monitoring. Because no applicable comprehensive management algorithms for either cohort are available, it was necessary to develop them. METHODS: A consensus conference involving the 21 intensivists and neurosurgeons from the 8 trial sites used Delphi-based methodology to formulate management algorithms for both study cohorts. We included recommendations from the latest Brain Trauma Foundation pediatric sTBI guidelines and the consensus-based adult algorithms (Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference/Consensus Revised Imaging and Clinical Examination) wherever relevant. We used a consensus threshold of 80%. RESULTS: We developed comprehensive management algorithms for monitored and nonmonitored cohort children with sTBI. We defined suspected intracranial hypertension for the nonmonitored group, set minimum number and timing of computed tomography scans, specified minimal age-adjusted mean arterial pressure and cerebral perfusion pressure targets, defined clinical neuroworsening, described minimal requisites for intensive care unit management, produced tiered management algorithms for both groups, and listed treatments not routinely used. CONCLUSION: We will study these protocols in the Benchmark Evidence from Latin America-Treatment of Raised Intracranial Pressure-Pediatrics trial in low- and middle-income countries. Second, we present them here for consideration as prototype pediatric sTBI management algorithms in the absence of published alternatives, acknowledging their limited evidentiary status. Therefore, herein, we describe our study design only, not recommended treatment protocols.

The Roles of Protocols and Protocolization in Improving Outcome From Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Our Phase-I parallel-cohort study suggested that managing severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) in the absence of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring using an ad hoc Imaging and Clinical Examination (ICE) treatment protocol was associated with superior outcome vs nonprotocolized management but could not differentiate the influence of protocolization from that of the specific protocol. Phase II investigates whether adopting the Consensus REVised Imaging and Clinical Examination (CREVICE) protocol improved outcome directly or indirectly via protocolization. METHODS: We performed a Phase-II sequential parallel-cohort study examining adoption of the CREVICE protocol from no protocol vs a previous protocol in patients with sTBI older than 13 years presenting ≤24 hours after injury. Primary outcome was prespecified 6-month recovery. The study was done mostly at public South American centers managing sTBI without ICP monitoring. Fourteen Phase-I nonprotocol centers and 5 Phase-I protocol centers adopted CREVICE. Data were analyzed using generalized estimating equation regression adjusting for demographic imbalances. RESULTS: A total of 501 patients (86% male, mean age 35.4 years) enrolled; 81% had 6 months of follow-up. Adopting CREVICE from no protocol was associated with significantly superior results for overall 6-month extended Glasgow Outcome Score (GOSE) (protocol effect = 0.53 [0.11, 0.95], P = .013), mortality (36% vs 21%, HR = 0.59 [0.46, 0.76], P < .001), and orientation (Galveston Orientation and Amnesia Test discharge protocol effect = 10.9 [6.0, 15.8], P < .001, 6-month protocol effect = 11.4 [4.1, 18.6], P < .005). Adopting CREVICE from ICE was associated with significant benefits to GOSE (protocol effect = 0.51 [0.04, 0.98], P = .033), 6-month mortality (25% vs 18%, HR = 0.55 [0.39, 0.77], P < .001), and orientation (Galveston Orientation and Amnesia Test 6-month protocol effect = 9.2 [3.6, 14.7], P = .004). Comparing both groups using CREVICE, those who had used ICE previously had significantly better GOSE (protocol effect = 1.15 [0.09, 2.20], P = .033). CONCLUSION: Centers managing adult sTBI without ICP monitoring should strongly consider protocolization through adopting/adapting the CREVICE protocol. Protocolization is indirectly supported at sTBI centers regardless of resource availability.

Testing the Impact of Protocolized Care of Patients With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Without Intracranial Pressure Monitoring: The Imaging and Clinical Examination Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) in low- or-middle-income countries and surprisingly many in high-income countries are managed without intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. The impact of the first published protocol (Imaging and Clinical Examination [ICE] protocol) is untested against nonprotocol management. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients treated in intensive care units (ICUs) using the ICE protocol have lower mortality and better neurobehavioral functioning than those treated in ICUs using no protocol. METHODS: This study involved nineteen mostly public South American hospitals. This is a prospective cohort study, enrolling patients older than 13 years with sTBI presenting within 24 h of injury (January 2014-July 2015) with 6-mo postinjury follow-up. Five hospitals treated all sTBI cases using the ICE protocol; 14 used no protocol. Primary outcome was prespecified composite of mortality, orientation, functional outcome, and neuropsychological measures. RESULTS: A total of 414 patients (89% male, mean age 34.8 years) enrolled; 81% had 6 months of follow-up. All participants included in composite outcome analysis: average percentile (SD) = 46.8 (24.0) nonprotocol, 56.9 (24.5) protocol. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) used to account for center effects (confounder-adjusted difference [95% CI] = 12.2 [4.6, 19.8], P = .002). Kaplan-Meier 6-month mortality (95% CI) = 36% (30%, 43%) nonprotocol, 25% (19%, 31%) protocol (GEE and confounder-adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI] = .69 [.43, 1.10], P = .118). Six-month Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale for 332 participants: average Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale score (SD) = 3.6 (2.6) nonprotocol, 4.7 (2.8) protocol (GEE and confounder-adjusted and lost to follow-up-adjusted difference [95% CI] = 1.36 [.55, 2.17], P = .001). CONCLUSION: ICUs managing patients with sTBI using the ICE protocol had better functional outcome than those not using a protocol. ICUs treating patients with sTBI without ICP monitoring should consider protocolization. The ICE protocol, tested here and previously, is 1 option.

The Pediatric Guideline Adherence and Outcomes (PEGASUS Argentina) program in severe traumatic brain injury: study protocol adaptations during the COVID-19 pandemic for a multisite implementation-effectiveness cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this protocol is to describe the study protocol changes made and subsequently implemented to the Pediatric Guideline Adherence and Outcomes (PEGASUS) Argentina randomized controlled trial (RCT) for care of children with severe traumatic brain injuries (TBI) imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. The PEGASUS study group met in spring 2020 to evaluate available literature review guidance and the study design change or pausing options due to the potential interruption of research. METHODS: As a parallel cluster RCT, pediatric patients with severe TBIs are admitted to 8 control (usual care) and 8 intervention (PEGASUS program) hospitals in Argentina, Chile, and Paraguay. PEGASUS is an intervention that aims to increase guideline adherence and best practice care for improving patient outcomes using multi-level implementation science-based approaches. Strengths and weaknesses of proposed options were assessed and resulted in a decision to revert from a stepped wedge to a parallel cluster RCT but to not delay planned implementation. DISCUSSION: The parallel cluster design was considered more robust and flexible to secular interruptions and acceptable and feasible to the local study sites in this situation. Due to the early stage of the study, the team had flexibility to redesign and implement a design more compatible with the conditions of the research landscape in 2020 while balancing analytical methods and power, logistical and implementation feasibility, and acceptability. As of fall 2022, the PEGASUS RCT has been active for nearly 2 years of implementation and data collection, scheduled to be completed in in fall 2023. The experience of navigating research during this period will influence decisions about future research design, strategies, and contingencies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pediatric Guideline Adherence and Outcomes-Argentina. Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03896789 on April 1, 2019.

Provider perceptions of severe pediatric traumatic brain injury care priorities across hospitals in South America before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: To understand provider perceptions of the COVID-19 pandemic on priorities of severe pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) care across hospitals in South America. METHODS: Site principal investigators (PIs) from 17 hospitals in South America enrolled in the PEGASUS-Argentina randomized controlled trial completed questionnaires regarding order of tasks performed in the care of a typical pediatric patient with severe TBI before (2019) and during (2021) the COVID-19 pandemic. Acute care processes were examined by quintiles to identify early, mid, and late actions and were categorized and compared. Associations of hospital volume and subspecialty resource availability with prioritization of key process actions were examined. FINDING: Site PIs from 15 and 16 hospitals completed the surveys in 2019 and 2021, respectively, including 14 who completed both. Action category order was stable between 2019 and 2021 and were ranked in priorities as: initial encounter, primary survey, interventions and invasive monitors, diagnostics, medications, staff communication, then disposition (in 2019) or nutrition (in 2021). There was variation in specific action order between hospitals at both timepoints, with only a few initial encounter and disposition actions limited to a single quintile. There was no reported association between hospital volume or subspecialty resource availability with prioritization of key process actions. INTERPRETATION: Despite novel healthcare challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, providers in South America perceived maintaining standard severe pediatric TBI care consistent with BTF guidelines. There was large variability in specific action order between individual hospitals reported.

The Status of Quality Improvement Programs for Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury Care in Argentina.

INTRODUCTION: Trauma quality improvement (QI) programs improve care and outcomes for injured patients. Information about QI programs for pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) is sparse in Latin America. METHODS: We gathered data on the status of QI programs and activities that encompass pediatric TBI at 15 Argentine hospitals. Data were gathered during 2019 and included hospital characteristics, QI practices, presence of a queryable registry, and use of protocols for TBI care. Level of QI activities was compared between hospital types using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Most hospitals had guidelines for pediatric TBI care, including management and/or prevention of intracranial pressure (100%) and central-line-associated infections (87%). Morbidity and mortality meetings or other types of case discussions in which quality of pediatric TBI care was discussed were held by all hospitals, with most (53%) having weekly-monthly meetings, but 27% having rare or annual meetings. Sixty percent of hospitals had adequate data for case reviews (fewer than 25% of cases with essential information missing). Fifty-three percent documented discussions that occurred at these meetings and 53% utilized computerized trauma registries. Larger hospitals (> 200 beds) more frequently had adequate data (88%) for case reviews than smaller hospitals (29%, P = 0.046). Hospital size did not affect other QI activities. CONCLUSIONS: Most hospitals had guidelines for pediatric TBI care. Adequacy of care was discussed at reasonably frequent case conferences. Opportunities for improvement include increasing documentation of case reviews and improving adequacy of data for case reviews, especially at smaller hospitals. Greater use of computerized trauma registries could provide such data.

Consensus-Based Management Protocol (CREVICE Protocol) for the Treatment of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Based on Imaging and Clinical Examination for Use When Intracranial Pressure Monitoring Is Not Employed.

Globally, intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring use in severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) is inconsistent and susceptible to resource limitations and clinical philosophies. For situations without monitoring, there is no published comprehensive management algorithm specific to identifying and treating suspected intracranial hypertension (SICH) outside of the one ad hoc Imaging and Clinical Examination (ICE) protocol in the Benchmark Evidence from South American Trials: Treatment of Intracranial Pressure (BEST:TRIP) trial. As part of an ongoing National Institutes of Health (NIH)-supported project, a consensus conference involving 43 experienced Latin American Intensivists and Neurosurgeons who routinely care for sTBI patients without ICP monitoring, refined, revised, and augmented the original BEST:TRIP algorithm. Based on BEST:TRIP trial data and pre-meeting polling, 11 issues were targeted for development. We used Delphi-based methodology to codify individual statements and the final algorithm, using a group agreement threshold of 80%. The resulting CREVICE (Consensus REVised ICE) algorithm defines SICH and addresses both general management and specific treatment. SICH treatment modalities are organized into tiers to guide treatment escalation and tapering. Treatment schedules were developed to facilitate targeted management of disease severity. A decision-support model, based on the group's combined practices, is provided to guide this process. This algorithm provides the first comprehensive management algorithm for treating sTBI patients when ICP monitoring is not available. It is intended to provide a framework to guide clinical care and direct future research toward sTBI management. Because of the dearth of relevant literature, it is explicitly consensus based, and is provided solely as a resource (a "consensus-based curbside consult") to assist in treating sTBI in general intensive care units in resource-limited environments.

A clinical decision rule to predict intracranial hypertension in severe traumatic brain injury.

OBJECTIVE: While existing guidelines support the treatment of intracranial hypertension in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), it is unclear when to suspect and initiate treatment for high intracranial pressure (ICP). The objective of this study was to derive a clinical decision rule that accurately predicts intracranial hypertension. METHODS: Using Delphi methods, the authors identified a set of potential predictors of intracranial hypertension and a clinical decision rule a priori by consensus among a group of 43 neurosurgeons and intensivists who have extensive experience managing severe TBI without ICP monitoring. To validate these predictors, the authors used data from a Latin American trial (n = 150; BEST TRIP). To report on the performance of the rule, they calculated sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values with 95% confidence intervals. In a secondary analysis, the rule was validated using data from a North American trial (n = 131; COBRIT). RESULTS: The final predictors and the clinical decision rule were approved by 97% of participants in the consensus working group. The predictors are divided into major and minor criteria. High ICP would be considered suspected in the presence of 1 major or ≥ 2 minor criteria. Major criteria are: compressed cisterns (CT classification of Marshall diffuse injury [DI] III), midline shift > 5 mm (Marshall DI IV), or nonevacuated mass lesion. Minor criteria are: Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) motor score ≤ 4, pupillary asymmetry, abnormal pupillary reactivity, or Marshall DI II. The area under the curve for the logistic regression model that contains all the predictors was 0.86. When high ICP was defined as > 22 mm Hg, the decision rule performed with a sensitivity of 93.9% (95% CI 85.0%-98.3%), a specificity of 42.3% (95% CI 31.7%-53.6%), a positive predictive value of 55.5% (95% CI 50.7%-60.2%), and a negative predictive value of 90% (95% CI 77.1%-96.0%). The sensitivity of the clinical decision rule improved with higher ICP cutoffs up to a sensitivity of 100% when intracranial hypertension was defined as ICP > 30 mm Hg. Similar results were found in the North American cohort. CONCLUSIONS: A simple clinical decision rule based on a combination of clinical and imaging findings was found to be highly sensitive in distinguishing patients with severe TBI who would suffer intracranial hypertension. It could be used to identify patients who require ICP monitoring in high-resource settings or start ICP-lowering treatment in environments where resource limitations preclude invasive monitoring.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02059941 (clinicaltrials.gov).

A Method of Managing Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in the Absence of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring: The Imaging and Clinical Examination Protocol.

The imaging and clinical examination (ICE) algorithm used in the Benchmark Evidence from South American Trials: Treatment of Intracranial Pressure (BEST TRIP) randomized controlled trial is the only prospectively investigated clinical protocol for traumatic brain injury management without intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. As the default literature standard, it warrants careful evaluation. We present the ICE protocol in detail and analyze the demographics, outcome, treatment intensity, frequency of intervention usage, and related adverse events in the ICE-protocol cohort. The 167 ICE protocol patients were young (median 29 years) with a median Glasgow Coma Scale motor score of 4 but with anisocoria or abnormal pupillary reactivity in 40%. This protocol produced outcomes not significantly different from those randomized to the monitor-based protocol (favorable 6-month extended Glasgow Outcome Score in 39%; 41% mortality rate). Agents commonly employed to treat suspected intracranial hypertension included low-/moderate-dose hypertonic saline (72%) and mannitol (57%), mild hyperventilation (adjusted partial pressure of carbon dioxide 30-35 mm Hg in 73%), and pressors to maintain cerebral perfusion (62%). High-dose hyperosmotics or barbiturates were uncommonly used. Adverse event incidence was low and comparable to the BEST TRIP monitored group. Although this protocol should produce similar/acceptable results under circumstances comparable to those in the trial, influences such as longer pre-hospital times and non-specialist transport personnel, plus an intensive care unit model of aggressive physician-intensive care by small groups of neurotrauma-focused intensivists, which differs from most high-resource models, support caution in expecting the same results in dissimilar settings. Finally, this protocol's ICP-titration approach to suspected intracranial hypertension (vs. crisis management for monitored ICP) warrants further study.

Development of a Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus-Based Treatment Protocol Conference in Latin America.

BACKGROUND: Severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) is a significant global health problem disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Management of intracranial hypertension in sTBI is crucial to survival and optimal recovery. Practitioners in high-income countries routinely use intracranial pressure (ICP) monitors although their usefulness has been questioned. ICP monitors are usually unavailable in LMICs. No consensus-based/tested protocols or literature exists for sTBI treatment without ICP monitoring. METHODS: Investigators developed serial SurveyMonkey surveys for Latin American neurointensivists and neurosurgeons to determine current practice. These clinicians had extensive routine ongoing experience in sTBI without ICP monitoring. Surveys were administered and analyzed before/during/after a 2015 Buenos Aires consensus conference. Investigators identified areas of convergence blinded from colleagues' responses. A 47-clinician task force, representing 15 countries, who routinely manage patients with sTBI without monitors developed consensus-based treatment guidelines during a 3-day facilitated conference. RESULTS: Elements were added to the protocol at an 80% agreement threshold. Follow-on surveys resolved remaining elements to 97% agreement. The protocol addresses both tapering (on improvement) and neuroworsening. Staged treatment options were identified, plus unique clinical practice issues. This process introduced a research method to a large multidisciplinary group of LMIC clinicians. This report describes the process used to develop an LMIC-specific protocol that is transferable to other diseases/injuries. The protocol is being tested in 5 LMICs. CONCLUSIONS: We derived consensus-based guidelines for sTBI treatment without ICP monitoring, and introduced a research method to a large multidisciplinary group of LMIC clinicians naive to such methods.

The Outcome of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in Latin America.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) disproportionately affects lower- and middle-income countries (LMIC). The factors influencing outcomes in LMIC have not been examined as rigorously as in higher-income countries. METHODS: This study was conducted to examine clinical and demographic factors influencing TBI outcomes in Latin American LMIC. Data were prospectively collected during a randomized trial of intracranial pressure monitoring in severe TBI and a companion observational study. Participants were aged ≥13 years and admitted to study hospitals with Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤8. The primary outcome was Glasgow Outcome Scale, Extended (GOS-E) score at 6 months. Predictors were analyzed using a multivariable proportional odds model created by forward stepwise selection. RESULTS: A total of 550 patients were identified. Six-month outcomes were available for 88%, of whom 37% had died and 44% had achieved a GOS-E score of 5-8. In multivariable proportional odds modeling, higher Glasgow Coma Scale motor score (odds ratio [OR], 1.41 per point; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-1.61) and epidural hematoma (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.17-2.86) were significant predictors of higher GOS-E score, whereas advanced age (OR, 0.65 per 10 years; 95% CI, 0.57-0.73) and cisternal effacement (P < 0.001) were associated with lower GOS-E score. Study site (P < 0.001) and race (P = 0.004) significantly predicted outcome, outweighing clinical variables such as hypotension and pupillary examination. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality from severe TBI is high in Latin American LMIC, although the rate of favorable recovery is similar to that of high-income countries. Demographic factors such as race and study site played an outsized role in predicting outcome; further research is required to understand these associations.

Intensive care treatments associated with favorable discharge outcomes in Argentine children with severe traumatic brain injury: For the South American Guideline Adherence Group.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the critical care management of children with traumatic brain injury (TBI) in low middle income countries. We aimed to identify indicators of intensive care unit (ICU) treatments associated with favorable outcomes in Argentine children with severe TBI. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from patients previously enrolled in a prospective seven center study of children with severe TBI who were admitted to an ICU in one of the seven study centers. Severe TBI was defined by head AIS ≥ 3, head CT with traumatic lesion, and admission GCS < 9. Seven indicators of best practice TBI care were examined. The primary outcome was discharge Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category Scale [PCPC] and Pediatric Overall Performance category Scale [POPC]. We also examined variation in ICU care and in-patient mortality. RESULTS: Of the 117 children, 67% were male and 7.5 (4.3) years on average, 92% had isolated TBI. Hypotension (54%) was more common than hypoxia (28%) and clinical or radiographic signs of high intracranial pressure (ICP) were observed in 92%. Yet, ICP monitoring occurred in 60% and hyperosmolar therapy was used in only 36%. Adherence to indicators of best TBI practice ranged from 55.6% to 83.7% across the seven centers and adherence was associated with favorable discharge PCPC (aRR 0.98; 95% CI [0.96, 0.99]), and POPC (aRR 0.98; 95% CI [0.96, 0.99]). Compared to patients whose adherence rates were below 65%, patients whose adherence rates were higher between 75%-100% had better discharge PCPC (aRR 0.28; 95% CI [0.10, 0.83]) and POPC (aRR 0.32; 95% CI [0.15, 0.73]. Two indicators were associated with favorable discharge PCPC: Avoidance of hypoxia (aRR 0.46; 95% CI [0.23, 0.93]), and Nutrition started in 72 hours (aRR 0.45; 95% CI [0.21, 0.99]). Avoiding hypoxia was also associated with favorable discharge POPC (aRR 0.47; 95% CI [0.22, 0.99]). CONCLUSION: There is variation in Argentine ICU practice in the care of children with severe TBI. Second insults are common and hyperosmolar therapy use is uncommon. Adherence to best practice TBI care by avoiding hypoxia and providing timely nutrition were associated with significantly favorable discharge outcomes. Implementing strategies that prevent hypoxia and facilitate early nutrition in the ICUs are urgently needed to improve pediatric TBI outcomes.

Benchmarking Prehospital and Emergency Department Care for Argentine Children with Traumatic Brain Injury: For the South American Guideline Adherence Group.

OBJECTIVE: There is little information on the type of early care provided to children with traumatic brain injury (TBI) in low middle income countries. We benchmarked early prehospital [PH] and emergency department [ED] pediatric TBI care in Argentina. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from patients previously enrolled in a prospective seven center study of children with TBI. Eligible participants were patients 0-18 years, and had diagnosis of TBI (admission Glasgow Coma scale score [GCS] < 13 or with GCS 14-15 and abnormal head CT scan within 48 hours of admission, and head AIS > 0). Outcomes were transport type, transport time, PH and ED adherence to best practice, and discharge Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category Scale (PCPC) and Pediatric Overall Performance category Scale (POPC). RESULTS: Of the 366 children, mean age was 8.7 (5.0) years, 58% were male, 90% had isolated TBI and 45.4% were transported by private vehicle. 50 (34.7%) of the 144 children with severe TBI (39.3% of all TBI patients) were transported by private vehicle. Most (267; 73%) patients received initial TBI care at an index hospital prior to study center admission, including children with severe (81.9%) TBI. Transport times were shorter for those patients who were directly transported by ambulance to study center than for the whole cohort (1.4 vs.5.5 hours). Ambulance blood pressure data were recorded in 30.9%. ED guideline adherence rate was higher than PH guideline adherence rate (84.8% vs. 26.4%). For patients directly transferred from scene to study trauma centers, longer transport time was associated with worse discharge outcome (PCPC aOR 1.10 [1.04, 1.18] and (POPC aOR 1.10 [1.04, 1.18]). There was no relationship between PH or ED TBI guideline adherence rate and discharge POPC and PCPC. CONCLUSION: This study benchmarks early pediatric TBI care in Argentina and shows that many critically injured children with TBI do not receive timely or best practice PH care, that PH guideline adherence rate is low and that longer transport time was associated with poor discharge outcomes for patients with direct transfer status. There is an urgent need to improve the early care of children with TBI in Argentina, especially timely transportation to a hospital.

Postdischarge Care of Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury in Argentina: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To develop, in partnership with families of children with traumatic brain injury, a postdischarge intervention that is effective, simple, and sustainable. DESIGN: Randomized Controlled Trial. SETTING: Seven Level 1 Pediatric Trauma Centers in Argentina. PATIENTS: Persons less than 19 years of age admitted to one of the study hospitals with a diagnosis of severe, moderate, or complicated mild traumatic brain injury and were discharged alive. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to either the intervention or standard care group. A specially trained Community Resource Coordinator was assigned to each family in the intervention group. We hypothesized that children with severe, moderate, and complicated mild traumatic brain injury who received the intervention would have significantly better functional outcomes at 6 months post discharge than those who received standard care. We further hypothesized that there would be a direct correlation between patient outcome and measures of family function. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was a composite measured at 6 months post injury. There were 308 patients included in the study (61% men). Forty-four percent sustained a complicated mild traumatic brain injury, 18% moderate, and 38% severe. Sixty-five percent of the patients were 8 years old or younger, and over 70% were transported to the hospital without ambulance assistance. There was no significant difference between groups on the primary outcome measure. There was a statistically significant correlation between the primary outcome measure and the scores on the Family Impact Module of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (ρ = 0.57; p < 0.0001). Children with better outcomes lived with families reporting better function at 6 months post injury. CONCLUSIONS: Although no significant effect of the intervention was demonstrated, this study represents the first conducted in Latin America that documents the complete course of treatment for pediatric patients with traumatic brain injury spanning hospital transport through hospital care and into the postdischarge setting.

A trial of intracranial-pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Intracranial-pressure monitoring is considered the standard of care for severe traumatic brain injury and is used frequently, but the efficacy of treatment based on monitoring in improving the outcome has not been rigorously assessed. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, controlled trial in which 324 patients 13 years of age or older who had severe traumatic brain injury and were being treated in intensive care units (ICUs) in Bolivia or Ecuador were randomly assigned to one of two specific protocols: guidelines-based management in which a protocol for monitoring intraparenchymal intracranial pressure was used (pressure-monitoring group) or a protocol in which treatment was based on imaging and clinical examination (imaging-clinical examination group). The primary outcome was a composite of survival time, impaired consciousness, and functional status at 3 months and 6 months and neuropsychological status at 6 months; neuropsychological status was assessed by an examiner who was unaware of protocol assignment. This composite measure was based on performance across 21 measures of functional and cognitive status and calculated as a percentile (with 0 indicating the worst performance, and 100 the best performance). RESULTS: There was no significant between-group difference in the primary outcome, a composite measure based on percentile performance across 21 measures of functional and cognitive status (score, 56 in the pressure-monitoring group vs. 53 in the imaging-clinical examination group; P=0.49). Six-month mortality was 39% in the pressure-monitoring group and 41% in the imaging-clinical examination group (P=0.60). The median length of stay in the ICU was similar in the two groups (12 days in the pressure-monitoring group and 9 days in the imaging-clinical examination group; P=0.25), although the number of days of brain-specific treatments (e.g., administration of hyperosmolar fluids and the use of hyperventilation) in the ICU was higher in the imaging-clinical examination group than in the pressure-monitoring group (4.8 vs. 3.4, P=0.002). The distribution of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with severe traumatic brain injury, care focused on maintaining monitored intracranial pressure at 20 mm Hg or less was not shown to be superior to care based on imaging and clinical examination. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01068522.).