Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major health and socioeconomic problem that affects all societies. In recent years, patterns of injury have been changing, with more injuries, particularly contusions, occurring in older patients. Blast injuries have been identified as a novel entity with specific characteristics. Traditional approaches to the classification of clinical severity are the subject of debate owing to the widespread policy of early sedation and ventilation in more severely injured patients, and are being supplemented with structural and functional neuroimaging. Basic science research has greatly advanced our knowledge of the mechanisms involved in secondary damage, creating opportunities for medical intervention and targeted therapies; however, translating this research into patient benefit remains a challenge. Clinical management has become much more structured and evidence based since the publication of guidelines covering many aspects of care. In this Review, we summarise new developments and current knowledge and controversies, focusing on moderate and severe TBI in adults. Suggestions are provided for the way forward, with an emphasis on epidemiological monitoring, trauma organisation, and approaches to management.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/laneur/PIIS1474-4422(08)70164-9.pdf

Moderate and severe traumatic brain injury in adults.

The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) is the most widely used outcome measure after traumatic brain injury, but it is increasingly recognized to have important limitations. It is proposed that shortcomings of the GOS can be addressed by adopting a standard format for the interview used to assign outcome. A set of guidelines are outlined that are directed at the main problems encountered in applying the GOS. The guidelines cover the general principles underlying the use of the GOS and common practical problems of applying the scale. Structured interview schedules are described for both the five-point GOS and an extended eight-point GOS (GOSE). An interrater reliability study of the structured interviews for the GOS and GOSE yielded weighted kappa values of 0.89 and 0.85, respectively. It is concluded that assessment of the GOS using a standard format with a written protocol is practical and reliable.

Structured interviews for the Glasgow Outcome Scale and the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale: Guidelines for their use

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(05)17826-X.pdf

Early surgery versus initial conservative treatment in patients with spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral haematomas in the International Surgical Trial in Intracerebral Haemorrhage (STICH): a randomised trial

Additional co-authors: Endre Czeiter, Marek Czosnyka, Ramon Diaz-Arrastia, Jens P Dreier, Ann-Christine Duhaime, Ari Ercole, Thomas A van Essen, Valery L Feigin, Guoyi Gao, Joseph Giacino, Laura E Gonzalez-Lara, Russell L Gruen, Deepak Gupta, Jed A Hartings, Sean Hill, Ji-yao Jiang, Naomi Ketharanathan, Erwin J O Kompanje, Linda Lanyon, Steven Laureys, Fiona Lecky, Harvey Levin, Hester F Lingsma, Marc Maegele, Marek Majdan, Geoffrey Manley, Jill Marsteller, Luciana Mascia, Charles McFadyen, Stefania Mondello, Virginia Newcombe, Aarno Palotie, Paul M Parizel, Wilco Peul, James Piercy, Suzanne Polinder, Louis Puybasset, Todd E Rasmussen, Rolf Rossaint, Peter Smielewski, Jeannette Soderberg, Simon J Stanworth, Murray B Stein, Nicole von Steinbuchel, William Stewart, Ewout W Steyerberg, Nino Stocchetti, Anneliese Synnot, Braden Te Ao, Olli Tenovuo, Alice Theadom, Dick Tibboel, Walter Videtta, Kevin K W Wang, W Huw Williams, Kristine Yaffe for the InTBIR Participants and Investigators

/pdf/traumatic-brain-injury-integrated-approaches-to-improve-29obvlh2iu.pdf

Traumatic brain injury: integrated approaches to improve prevention, clinical care, and research

Patients in the craniectomy group, as compared with those in the standard-care group, had less time with intracranial pressures above the treatment threshold (P<0.001), fewer interventions for increased intracranial pressure (P<0.02 for all comparisons), and fewer days in the intensive care unit (ICU) (P<0.001). However, patients undergoing craniectomy had worse scores on the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale than those receiving standard care (odds ratio for a worse score in the craniectomy group, 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05 to 3.24; P = 0.03) and a greater risk of an unfavorable outcome (odds ratio, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.14 to 4.26; P = 0.02). Rates of death at 6 months were similar in the craniectomy group (19%) and the standard-care group (18%). Conclusions In adults with severe diffuse traumatic brain injury and refractory intracranial hypertension, early bifrontotemporoparietal decompressive craniectomy decreased intracranial pressure and the length of stay in the ICU but was associated with more unfavorable outcomes. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and others; DECRA Australian Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN012605000009617.)

/pdf/decompressive-craniectomy-in-diffuse-traumatic-brain-injury-39d8tyee23.pdf

Decompressive Craniectomy in Diffuse Traumatic Brain Injury

The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), two decades after its description, remains the most widely used method of analyzing outcome in series of severely head-injured patients. This review considers limitations recognized in the use of the GOS and discusses a new approach to assessment, using a structured questionnaire-based interview. Assignments can be made to an extended eight-point scale (GOSE) as well as the original five-point approach—in each case, with a high degree of interobserver consistency. The assignments are coherent with the principles of the World Health Organization classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps, and their validity is supported by strong associations with the results of neuropsychological testing and assessment of general health status. The need to allow for disability existing before injury, issues concerning the time of assessment after injury, and subdivisions of the scale into "favorable" and "unfavorable" categories are discussed. It is concluded that,...

Analyzing Outcome of Treatment of Severe Head Injury: A Review and Update on Advancing the Use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale

OBJECTIVE There is current debate over the issue of the best way of assessing outcome after head injury. One criticism of scales of disability and handicap such as the Glasgow outcome scale (GOS) is that they fail to capture the subjective perspective of the person with head injury. The aims of the study were to investigate aspects of the validity of structured interviews for the GOS, and address the issue of the relation between the GOS and subjective reports of health outcome. METHODS A total of 135 patients with head injury were assessed using the GOS and an extended GOS (GOSE) and other measures of outcome and clinical status at 6 months after injury. RESULTS There were robust correlations between the GOS and measures of initial injury severity (particularly post-traumatic amnesia) and outcome assessed by disability scales (particularly the disbility rating scale (DRS)); however, associations with cognitive tests were generally modest. There were also strong correlations with self report measures of health outcome: both the GOS and GOSE were related to depression measured by the Beck depression inventory, mental wellbeing assessed by the general health questionnaire, and to all subscales of the short form-36. The GOS scales were also strongly associated with frequency of reported symptoms and problems on the neurobehavioural functioning inventory. CONCLUSIONS The GOS and GOSE show consistent relations with other outcome measures including subjective reports of health outcome; they thus remain useful overall summary assessments of outcome of head injury.

https://jnnp.bmj.com/content/jnnp/69/2/204.full.pdf

Emotional and cognitive consequences of head injury in relation to the Glasgow outcome scale

Object. The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) is widely used to assess outcome after head injury, but is recognized as having a number of shortcomings that are highlighted and investigated in this study. The authors pursued two goals: 1) investigating the practicality of using a standard set of questions as part of a structured interview to assign GOS scores, and 2) studying the role of preinjury problems in confounding postinjury assessment of disability. Methods. Several of the major limitations of the GOS appear to arise from the use of a format that encourages impressionistic ratings. In the present study the authors examined the use of a standard interview for assessing the GOS covering five areas of social disability. Ratings were made for 80 head-injured patients. The results show that the rating based on the GOS provides an assessment of disability that is more complete than that given by an alternative scale of functional disability (Disability Rating Scale [DRS]) and much more complete than an assessm...

L. E. L. Pettigrew

Papers

Structured interviews for the Glasgow Outcome Scale and the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale: Guidelines for their use

Analyzing Outcome of Treatment of Severe Head Injury: A Review and Update on Advancing the Use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale

Emotional and cognitive consequences of head injury in relation to the Glasgow outcome scale

Assessing disability after head injury: improved use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale