Posts Tagged Brain Injuries

[Abstract] Understanding the multidimensional nature of sexuality after traumatic brain injury

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the association of sexuality with sociodemographic (age, sex, education), medical (injury severity, time since injury), physical (fatigue, pain, independence), neuropsychological (memory, attention, executive function), psychological (depression, anxiety, self-esteem), and social participation factors after traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Design

Survey. Individuals with TBI completed measures at a mean average of 2.78 years post-injury (range = 1-10.3 years).

Setting

All participants were community based at the time of data collection.

Participants

Eighty-four individuals with TBI consecutively recruited after discharge from rehabilitation and 88 age-, sex- and education-matched controls recruited from the general community.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measure

Brain Injury Questionnaire of Sexuality (BIQS).

Results

Individuals with TBI performed significantly worse on sexuality, mood and self-esteem measures compared to the healthy control group, supporting previous findings. Research findings highlighted a range of significant correlations between sociodemographic, physical, neuropsychological, psychological and social participation factors and sexuality outcomes after TBI. In the multiple regression model, older age, greater depression and lower self-esteem were significant predictors of poorer sexuality post-injury. Further analyses indicated that depression mediated the independent relationships between lower social participation and greater fatigue with a decline in sexuality after TBI.

Conclusions

These findings support sexuality changes after TBI as a multidimensional construct, highlighting depression as a key mechanism through which other factors may impact sexual functioning. Further research is needed to target assessment and intervention services for sexuality problems after TBI.

via Understanding the multidimensional nature of sexuality after traumatic brain injury – Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Understanding the multidimensional nature of sexuality after traumatic brain injury

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the association of sexuality with sociodemographic (age, sex, education), medical (injury severity, time since injury), physical (fatigue, pain, independence), neuropsychological (memory, attention, executive function), psychological (depression, anxiety, self-esteem), and social participation factors after traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Design

Survey. Individuals with TBI completed measures at a mean average of 2.78 years post-injury (range = 1-10.3 years).

Setting

All participants were community based at the time of data collection.

Participants

Eighty-four individuals with TBI consecutively recruited after discharge from rehabilitation and 88 age-, sex- and education-matched controls recruited from the general community.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measure

Brain Injury Questionnaire of Sexuality (BIQS).

Results

Individuals with TBI performed significantly worse on sexuality, mood and self-esteem measures compared to the healthy control group, supporting previous findings. Research findings highlighted a range of significant correlations between sociodemographic, physical, neuropsychological, psychological and social participation factors and sexuality outcomes after TBI. In the multiple regression model, older age, greater depression and lower self-esteem were significant predictors of poorer sexuality post-injury. Further analyses indicated that depression mediated the independent relationships between lower social participation and greater fatigue with a decline in sexuality after TBI.

Conclusions

These findings support sexuality changes after TBI as a multidimensional construct, highlighting depression as a key mechanism through which other factors may impact sexual functioning. Further research is needed to target assessment and intervention services for sexuality problems after TBI.

via Understanding the multidimensional nature of sexuality after traumatic brain injury – ScienceDirect

, , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Randomized Feasibility Trial of a Novel, Integrative, and Intensive Virtual Rehabilitation Program for Service Members Post-Acquired Brain Injury – Full Text

Abstract

Introduction

Acquired Brain Injury, whether resulting from Traumatic brain injury (TBI) or Cerebral Vascular Accident (CVA), represent major health concerns for the Department of Defense and the nation. TBI has been referred to as the “signature” injury of recent U.S. military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan – affecting approximately 380,000 service members from 2000 to 2017; whereas CVA has been estimated to effect 795,000 individuals each year in the United States. TBI and CVA often present with similar motor, cognitive, and emotional deficits; therefore the treatment interventions for both often overlap. The Defense Health Agency and Veterans Health Administration would benefit from enhanced rehabilitation solutions to treat deficits resulting from acquired brain injuries (ABI), including both TBI and CVA. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of implementing a novel, integrative, and intensive virtual rehabilitation system for treating symptoms of ABI in an outpatient clinic. The secondary aim was to evaluate the system’s clinical effectiveness.

Materials and Methods

Military healthcare beneficiaries with ABI diagnoses completed a 6-week randomized feasibility study of the BrightBrainer Virtual Rehabilitation (BBVR) system in an outpatient military hospital clinic. Twenty-six candidates were screened, consented and randomized, 21 of whom completed the study. The BBVR system is an experimental adjunct ABI therapy program which utilizes virtual reality and repetitive bilateral upper extremity training. Four self-report questionnaires measured participant and provider acceptance of the system. Seven clinical outcomes included the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity, Box and Blocks Test, Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test, Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics, Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory, Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report, and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist- Civilian Version. The statistical analyses used bootstrapping, non-parametric statistics, and multilevel/hierarchical modeling as appropriate. This research was approved by the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center and Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences Institutional Review Boards.

Results

All of the participants and providers reported moderate to high levels of utility, ease of use and satisfaction with the BBVR system (x- = 73–86%). Adjunct therapy with the BBVR system trended towards statistical significance for the measure of cognitive function (ANAM [x- = −1.07, 95% CI −2.27 to 0.13, p = 0.074]); however, none of the other effects approached significance.

Conclusion

This research provides evidence for the feasibility of implementing the BBVR system into an outpatient military setting for treatment of ABI symptoms. It is believed these data justify conducting a larger, randomized trial of the clinical effectiveness of the BBVR system.

INTRODUCTION

Frequent use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) resulted in traumatic brain injury (TBI) being called the signature injury of recent conflicts.1 According to Department of Defense (DoD) reports, 379,519 service members received a TBI diagnosis from 2000 to 2017.2 Traumatic brain injuries are a subtype of acquired brain injury (ABI), which refers to any post-natal brain injury.3 Acquired brain injuries commonly present with symptoms of cognitive and motor impairment, and emotional instability that may persist for years and affect performance of activities of daily living (ADLs).4,5 Though survival rates of mild TBI (mTBI) are high, the resulting diminished quality of life calls for a greater focus on long-term TBI rehabilitative care.6

Another category of ABI, Cerebral Vascular Accident (CVA), often presents with similar impairments, such as diminished memory, upper extremity weakness and spasms, and depression.7–9 Moreover, those who have experienced a TBI are also at higher risk of CVA than those who have not.10,11 The majority of neurological recovery after TBI and CVA typically occurs within the first 6 months of injury, but training factors such as intensity, repetition, duration, patient motivation, and patient engagement may impact long-term treatment effectiveness on individuals in the chronic phase.12–16

Traditional rehabilitation protocols for individual’s post-ABI, such as proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF), are widely recognized but underutilized by therapists.17 Additionally, hands-on interventions, while well known, have limited evidence supporting their success with chronic ABI rehabilitation.18 With technological advancements it may be possible to link the traditional therapies with progressive opportunities, while also increasing patient engagement and decreasing provider burden.

One method of post-ABI rehabilitation with growing clinical acceptance is virtual reality (VR). Virtual reality is defined as a synthetic world that responds in real time to changes in user input, creating a constantly-engaging environment in which users participate.19 Virtual rehabilitation utilizes VR in a variety of clinically relevant domains,20 and offers a unique platform for ABI rehabilitation by engaging patients in appropriately challenging tasks.21 It provides the needed intensity of care, can unify treatment in an integrative rehabilitation, and can involve bimanual interactions engaging both hemispheres.22 A review of studies evaluating improvements in cognitive domains (e.g., executive function) indicates that computer-based cognitive rehabilitation programs which are tailored to the participant’s abilities often produce greater results compared to non-personalized cognitive rehabilitation computer programs.23

BrightBrainer Virtual Rehabilitation System

The BrightBrainer Virtual Rehabilitation (BBVR) program is a computer-based VR platform that utilizes real-time bimanual interaction for the purpose of increasing cognitive engagement compared to simple mouse, or single finger touch interaction. Bilateral training has been found to promote improved motor functioning for people who have experienced ABI, above and beyond unilateral training.24,25 This system facilitates split attention training (focusing), task sequencing (alternating actions between arms), hand-eye coordination, and dual tasking through use of simultaneous cognitive and motor challenges. Though the BBVR system was originally developed for geriatric patients with CVA, the use of adaptable games, bimanual tasks, and repetition may make it translatable as a tool for ABI treatment in a military population.26

While literature on VR therapy post-ABI is abundant, many of the systems either focus only on rehabilitation of one aspect of post-ABI deficits,27 or are too physically large to implement in most clinics.28 The BBVR system is unique because it combines cognitive and physical training in a compact, adaptive VR system which can be implemented largely unobtrusively into clinical space. This pilot study implemented the BBVR system within a Military Treatment Facility’s (MTF) outpatient occupational therapy clinic as a 6-week intervention for participants with ABI. The primary aim was to evaluate the feasibility of integrating the BBVR system into the clinic for both 1-on-1 provider-participant interaction and concurrent treatment in which 1 provider oversees 2 participants at a time. The 3 secondary aims were: (1) to evaluate the preliminary clinical effectiveness of the BBVR system in terms of motor function, cognitive performance, and behavioral/emotional symptoms; (2) to evaluate the dose-response effect of the BBVR system; and (3) to evaluate the correlation between participant-level BBVR game performance and longitudinal change in clinical outcomes.

Continue —-> Randomized Feasibility Trial of a Novel, Integrative, and Intensive Virtual Rehabilitation Program for Service Members Post-Acquired Brain Injury | Military Medicine | Oxford Academic

, , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Evidence-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation: Systematic Review of the Literature From 2009 Through 2014 – Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Η εικόνα ίσως περιέχει: κείμενο

Abstract

Objectives

To conduct an updated, systematic review of the clinical literature, classify studies based on the strength of research design, and derive consensual, evidence-based clinical recommendations for cognitive rehabilitation of people with traumatic brain injury (TBI) or stroke.

Data Sources

Online PubMed and print journal searches identified citations for 250 articles published from 2009 through 2014.

Study Selection

Selected for inclusion were 186 articles after initial screening. Fifty articles were initially excluded (24 focusing on patients without neurologic diagnoses, pediatric patients, or other patients with neurologic diagnoses, 10 noncognitive interventions, 13 descriptive protocols or studies, 3 nontreatment studies). Fifteen articles were excluded after complete review (1 other neurologic diagnosis, 2 nontreatment studies, 1 qualitative study, 4 descriptive articles, 7 secondary analyses). 121 studies were fully reviewed.

Data Extraction

Articles were reviewed by the Cognitive Rehabilitation Task Force (CRTF) members according to specific criteria for study design and quality, and classified as providing class I, class II, or class III evidence. Articles were assigned to 1 of 6 possible categories (based on interventions for attention, vision and neglect, language and communication skills, memory, executive function, or comprehensive-integrated interventions).

Data Synthesis

Of 121 studies, 41 were rated as class I, 3 as class Ia, 14 as class II, and 63 as class III. Recommendations were derived by CRTF consensus from the relative strengths of the evidence, based on the decision rules applied in prior reviews.

Conclusions

CRTF has now evaluated 491 articles (109 class I or Ia, 68 class II, and 314 class III) and makes 29 recommendations for evidence-based practice of cognitive rehabilitation (9 Practice Standards, 9 Practice Guidelines, 11 Practice Options). Evidence supports Practice Standards for (1) attention deficits after TBI or stroke; (2) visual scanning for neglect after right-hemisphere stroke; (3) compensatory strategies for mild memory deficits; (4) language deficits after left-hemisphere stroke; (5) social-communication deficits after TBI; (6) metacognitive strategy training for deficits in executive functioning; and (7) comprehensive-holistic neuropsychological rehabilitation to reduce cognitive and functional disability after TBI or stroke.

via Evidence-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation: Systematic Review of the Literature From 2009 Through 2014 – Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

, , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Evidence-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation: Systematic Review of the Literature From 2009 Through 2014 – Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Abstract

Objective

To conduct an updated, systematic review of the clinical literature, classify studies based on the strength of research design, and derive consensual, evidence-based clinical recommendations for cognitive rehabilitation of people with TBI or stroke.

Data Sources

Online Pubmed and print journal searches identified citations for 250 articles published from 2009 through 2014.

Study Selection

186 articles were selected for inclusion after initial screening. 50 articles were initially excluded (24 healthy, pediatric or other neurologic diagnoses, 10 non-cognitive interventions, 13 descriptive protocols or studies, 3 non-treatment studies). 15 articles were excluded after complete review (1 other neurologic diagnosis, 2 non-treatment studies, 1 qualitative study, 4 descriptive papers, 7 secondary analyses). 121 studies were fully reviewed.

Data Extraction

Articles were reviewed by CRTF members according to specific criteria for study design and quality, and classified as providing Class I, Class II, or Class III evidence. Articles were assigned to 1 of 6 possible categories (based on interventions for attention, vision and neglect, language and communication skills, memory, executive function, or comprehensive-integrated interventions).

Data Synthesis

Of 121 studies, 41 were rated as Class I, 3 as Class Ia, 14 as Class II, and 63 as Class III. Recommendations were derived by CRTF consensus from the relative strengths of the evidence, based on the decision rules applied in prior reviews.

Conclusions

CRTF has now evaluated 491 papers (109 Class I or Ia, 68 Class II, and 314 Class III) and makes 29 recommendations for evidence-based practice of cognitive rehabilitation (9 Practice Standards, 9 Practice Guidelines and 11 Practice Options). Evidence supports Practice Standards for attention deficits after TBI or stroke; visual scanning for neglect after right hemisphere stroke; compensatory strategies for mild memory deficits; language deficits after left hemisphere stroke; social communication deficits after TBI; metacognitive strategy training for deficits in executive functioning; and comprehensive-holistic neuropsychological rehabilitation to reduce cognitive and functional disability after TBI or stroke.

via Evidence-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation: Systematic Review of the Literature From 2009 Through 2014 – Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

, , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Advanced Therapy in Traumatic Brain Injury Inpatient Rehabilitation: Effects on Outcomes During the First Year after Discharge

Abstract

Objective

To use causal inference methods to determine if receipt of a greater proportion inpatient rehabilitation treatment focused on higher level functions, e.g. executive functions, ambulating over uneven surfaces (Advanced Therapy, AdvTx) results in better rehabilitation outcomes.

Design

A cohort study using propensity score methods applied to the TBI-Practice-Based Evidence (TBI-PBE) database, a database consisting of multi-site, prospective, longitudinal observational data.

Setting

Acute inpatient rehabilitation (IRF).

Participants

Patients enrolled in the TBI-PBE study (n=1843), aged 14 years or older, who sustained a severe, moderate, or complicated mild TBI, receiving their first IRF admission to one of 9 sites in the US, and consented to follow-up 3 and 9 months post discharge from inpatient rehabilitation.

Interventions

Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Participation Assessment with Recombined Tools-Objective-17, FIMTM Motor and Cognitive scores, Satisfaction with Life Scale, and Patient Health Questionnaire-9.

Results

Controlling for measured potential confounders, increasing the percentage of AdvTx during inpatient TBI rehabilitation was found to be associated with better community participation, functional independence, life satisfaction, and decreased likelihood of depression during the year following discharge from inpatient rehabilitation. Participants who began rehabilitation with greater disability experienced larger gains on some outcomes than those who began rehabilitation with more intact abilities.

Conclusions

Increasing the proportion of treatment targeting higher level functions appears to have no detrimental and a small, beneficial effect on outcome. Caution should be exercised when inferring causality given that a large number of potential confounders could not be completely controlled with propensity score methods. Further, the extent to which unmeasured confounders influenced the findings is not known and could be of particular concern due to the potential for the patient’s recovery trajectory to influence therapists’ decisions to provide a greater amount AdvTx.

via Advanced Therapy in Traumatic Brain Injury Inpatient Rehabilitation: Effects on Outcomes During the First Year after Discharge – Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

, , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Thirty Years of National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems Center Research—An Update – Full Text

The Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems Center (TBIMSC) program was established by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research in 1987, with the goal of conducting research to improve the care and outcomes for individuals with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). This article provides an update on TBIMSC research program activities since 2010 when a similar article was published. It includes (1) discussion of TBIMSC program management and infrastructure; (2) detail on the management, data quality, access, use, and knowledge translation of the TBIMSC National Database, with more than 16 000 participants with follow-up out to 25 years postinjury to date; (3) an overview of the TBIMSC site-specific studies and collaborative module research; (4) highlights of several collaborative initiatives between the TBIMSCs and other federal, advocacy, and research stakeholders; (5) an overview of the vast knowledge translation occurring through the TBIMSC program; and (6) discussion of issues that impact on the data collection methods for and contents of the TBIMSC National Database. On the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the TBIMSC program, this article highlights many of the accomplishments of this well-established, multicenter TBI research consortium.

THE TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY MODEL SYSTEMS CENTER (TBIMSC) program was established by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) (now the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research—NIDILRR) in 1987, with the goal of improving healthcare (especially rehabilitation care) and outcomes for patients with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), providing patient/family and healthcare professional education, and conducting research. In a 2010 article, we described the origin, activities, and accomplishments of the TBIMSCs, with a particular emphasis on the research activities.1 This year’s 30th anniversary of the TBIMSC program is an appropriate time to update the history and achievements. We focus on the research activities of the TBIMSC program, that is, the site-specific studies, collaborative studies, and longitudinal National Database (NDB), as well as on the multifaceted knowledge translation initiatives. We also provide examples of the many ways in which the infrastructure of the TBIMSC program has been leveraged in collaborations with other TBI stakeholders.

NIDILRR, the funder of much rehabilitation research in the United States, established the TBIMSC program to demonstrate the value of coordinated medical, social, and vocational services for persons with a moderate-to-severe TBI, a group that had started receiving inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) services in the 1970s, rather than being placed in psychiatric hospitals or other long-term care facilities.2 Grants supporting demonstration, education, and research, made for 5-year periods, initially went to 5 academic medical centers or equivalent entities; the number has been expanded over time, and for the 2017-2022 grant cycle, the number of recipients is 16 (see Table 1). The requirement of grantees that research activities are connected to a clinical program with emergency, acute neurosurgical, and inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation services is still key. The research funded involves contributions to the longitudinal NDB and collaboration on analysis of its data; site-specific research; and participation in module projects, which are shorter-term research projects undertaken by 2 or more TBIMSCs. The close cooperation between TBIMSCs on the NDB and module studies and the availability of extensive information on the rehabilitation patients at each center have been instrumental in the development of additional joint research, funded by NIDILRR, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Department of Defense (DoD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and other agencies. These mechanisms are described later, with recent and current projects listed.

TABLE 1

TABLE 1

Back to Top | Article Outline

MANAGEMENT

Management of joint activities involves the project directors (PDs) (principal investigators) of all TBIMSCs and their staff, collaborating in a number of standing and ad hoc committees, which communicate in twice-yearly, face-to-face meetings in Washington, District of Columbia, through regular conference calls and dozens of listservs. NIDILRR staff participate in most meetings, offering advice or clarifying agency objectives, rules and procedures. The staff of the TBI National Data and Statistical Center (NDSC), which is separately funded by NIDILRR, similarly play key roles, participating in management of and providing support for all multicenter activities. The 5 TBIMSC program’s standing committees are Executive, Planning, Research, Data, and Knowledge Translation (KT).

Special Interest Groups (SIGs) were first developed in 2008 to allow the TBIMSCs another avenue for research collaboration, focusing on developing new research efforts between centers as well as with outside entities. SIGs can be formed at any time, focus on mutual topics of interest to TBIMSC investigators, but do not necessarily conduct research, although research may result from their deliberations. SIGs are allotted time at PDs’ meetings and must also hold regularly scheduled conference calls to ensure continued progress toward stated goals. Currently active SIGs include the following: (1) Aging with TBI and TBI in the Elderly; (2) Analytic Procedures; (3) Caregiver and Family; (4) Cultural Issues; (5) Disorders of Consciousness; (6) PCORI; (7) Sleep-Wake-Fatigue; (8) Geographic Identifiers for Data Linkages; and (9) Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) Collaboration.

Back to Top | Article Outline

HISTORY 2010-2018

Move from the Department of Education to the Administration on Community Living

In October of 2014, NIDRR began the process of moving from the Department of Education (DoE) to the Administration on Community Living (ACL) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). With the move to ACL came an increased focus on independent living, and “NIDRR” became “NIDILRR.” ACL combines the efforts of NIDILRR, the HHS Office on Disability, the Administration on Aging, and the Administration on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and serves as the agency responsible for increasing access to community supports, focusing on the needs of people with disabilities throughout their life span as well as those of older Americans; it also has oversight of the State Implementation and Protection and Advocacy TBI program grants.

Back to Top | Article Outline

National Data and Statistical Center

Since 2006, Craig Hospital in Englewood, Colorado, has been funded via 5-year competitive awards from NIDILRR to serve as the TBIMSC NDSC. Major initiatives over the years have included a public and private Web site to describe the NDB and facilitate the work of the TBIMSCs; a Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) Manual with a Web-based template for all TBIMSC policies and procedures; a standardized follow-up interview, built into the data entry system; mechanisms to support defunded TBIMSCs to continue data collection with those participants already enrolled in the NDB; data collector certification processes; dynamic data summary reporting for each center and for the TBIMSCs as a whole; resources for improving cultural competency in TBI research; and the introduction of many advanced statistical methodologies to analyze the wealth of NDB longitudinal data. In the current NDSC funding cycle (2016-2021), major initiatives are the standardization of data curation and data sharing to support reproducible research, as well as collaboration with the NDSCs from the Spinal Cord Injury and the Burn Model Systems Center (MSC) programs to maximize standardization where possible and promote trauma injury research.

Back to Top | Article Outline

TBI Interagency Conferences

NIDILRR and the TBIMSCs have a major role in the hosting of the TBI Federal Interagency Conferences through the efforts of the KT Committee. To date, 4 have been held in the Washington, District of Columbia, area (December 1999, March 2006, June 2011, and June 2018). The most recent one had participation from more than 30 federal agencies and institutions, including NIDILRR, CDC, DoD, DoE, DVA, Health Resources & Services Administration, and NIH. The interdisciplinary conference offers an opportunity for federal policy and research administration staff and the researchers they fund to learn about cutting-edge research and emerging evidence-based practices.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Collaboration with the DVA Polytrauma Rehabilitation Centers

In 2005, the DVA established Polytrauma Rehabilitation Centers (PRCs), which focused on TBI after this became the signature injury of the Middle-East wars. In 2008, NIDILRR and the DVA signed an interagency agreement to create a database for the PRCs, which parallels the TBIMSC NDB. The NDSC created a separate but similar Web-based data management system and provides the same training, technical, and administrative support, SOP development, and data access as is afforded to the TBIMSCs. Four PRCs began enrollment in 2010: James A. Haley Veterans Hospital, Tampa, Florida (482 participants enrolled); Minneapolis VA Medical Center (138); Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center, Richmond, Virginia (213); and VA Palo Alto Health Care System, California (165). In 2014, the South Texas Veterans Health Care System joined this initiative; it has enrolled 84 participants. The active military and veteran participants are being followed at the same postinjury time points as the TBIMSC NDB (see later).

The collaboration between the DVA PRCs and the TBIMSC program has grown well beyond the parallel databases. The DVA PRCs have representation, including voting privileges, at the biannual TBIMSC meetings, and on TBIMSC committees and SIGs, including the DVA Collaboration SIG specifically designed as a mechanism to bring TBIMSC and DVA researchers together. In this collaboration, the VA PRCs are now referred to as the VA TBIMSCs, although funding for these centers remains separate from that for the (NIDILRR) TBIMSCs. To date, DVA researchers have initiated 27 analyses of the VA PRC database, with 8 already published; 3 analyses comparing the TBIMSC NDB with PRC NDB data have been completed or are under way.3–10

[…]

 

Continue —>  Thirty Years of National Institute on Disability, Independen… : The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation

 

, , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Review] Evidence-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation: Updated Review of the Literature From 2003 Through 2008

Abstract

Cicerone KD, Langenbahn DM, Braden C, Malec JF, Kalmar K, Fraas M, Felicetti T, Laatsch L, Harley JP, Bergquist T, Azulay J, Cantor J, Ashman T. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 2003 through 2008.

Objective

To update our clinical recommendations for cognitive rehabilitation of people with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and stroke, based on a systematic review of the literature from 2003 through 2008.

Data Sources

PubMed and Infotrieve literature searches were conducted using the terms attentionawarenesscognitivecommunicationexecutivelanguagememoryperceptionproblem solving, and/or reasoning combined with each of the following terms: rehabilitationremediation, and training for articles published between 2003 and 2008. The task force initially identified citations for 198 published articles.

Study Selection

One hundred forty-one articles were selected for inclusion after our initial screening. Twenty-nine studies were excluded after further detailed review. Excluded articles included 4 descriptive studies without data, 6 nontreatment studies, 7 experimental manipulations, 6 reviews, 1 single case study not related to TBI or stroke, 2 articles where the intervention was provided to caretakers, 1 article redacted by the journal, and 2 reanalyses of prior publications. We fully reviewed and evaluated 112 studies.

Data Extraction

Articles were assigned to 1 of 6 categories reflecting the primary area of intervention: attention; vision and visuospatial functioning; language and communication skills; memory; executive functioning, problem solving and awareness; and comprehensive-holistic cognitive rehabilitation. Articles were abstracted and levels of evidence determined using specific criteria.

Data Synthesis

Of the 112 studies, 14 were rated as class I, 5 as class Ia, 11 as class II, and 82 as class III. Evidence within each area of intervention was synthesized and recommendations for Practice StandardsPractice Guidelines, and Practice Options were made.

Conclusions

There is substantial evidence to support interventions for attention, memory, social communication skills, executive function, and for comprehensive-holistic neuropsychologic rehabilitation after TBI. Evidence supports visuospatial rehabilitation after right hemisphere stroke, and interventions for aphasia and apraxia after left hemisphere stroke. Together with our prior reviews, we have evaluated a total of 370 interventions, including 65 class I or Ia studies. There is now sufficient information to support evidence-based protocols and implement empirically-supported treatments for cognitive disability after TBI and stroke.

via Evidence-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation: Updated Review of the Literature From 2003 Through 2008 – Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

, , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Post-Acute Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation Treatment Variables: A Mixed Methods Study – Full Text

Abstract

Purpose

This study explores gains in function, measured by the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory-4 (MPAI-4) and qualitative interviews, of individuals who participated in a Post Hospital Interdisciplinary Brain Injury Rehabilitation – Residential (PHIDBIR-R) program as part of their recovery from brain injury.

Methods

The study uses a mixed methods design to identify correlates and explore pathways to functional recovery. Change scores from the MPAI-4 were derived to identify participants with greatest functional improvement. Qualitative interviews were employed to understand PHIDBIR-R program constructs associated with functional improvement. MPAI-4 data were derived from a bank of 135 PHIDBIR-R programs in 22 states. Participants were adults who sustained a brain injury and participated in a PHIDBIR-R program. 57 participants were identified as highest scorers; 10 completed semi-structured interviews.

Results

Data were analyzed using constant comparison procedures and rigorous credibility techniques. Thirteen themes within four categories (support, therapies, continuum of care, environment of care) emerged, reflecting participants’ understanding of constructs contributing to positive outcomes.

Conclusions

The results provided a cogent framework for program development, stakeholder program selection, and advocate and legislator considerations.

INTRODUCTION

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an alteration in brain function or other evidence of brain pathology caused by an external force. These injuries manifest as mild, moderate, or severe impairments to one or more areas, such as cognition, communication, memory, concentration, reasoning, physical functions, and psychosocial behavior [1].
The consequences of brain injuries are numerous with the potential to create life-long challenges for survivors and their families. Stories involving TBI permeate the news: the high-school athlete concussed in a football game, the soldier wounded in an explosive blast, and the teenager injured in a car accident. In these scenarios, futures transition from navigating routine activities to struggling to function.
A formidable fact surrounding these circumstances is that brain injury does not discriminate – it can happen to any person, at any time. Each year in the United States, 1.7 million TBIs occur either as an isolated injury or in conjunction with other injuries or illnesses. In the U.S., TBI is a contributing factor to nearly a third (30.5%) of all injury-related deaths [2] and figures indicate that 5.3 million people live with a TBI-related disability [3]. Annually, TBIs cost Americans $76.5 billion in medical care, rehabilitation, and loss of work [4,5].
Other etiologies of brain injury further elevate these numbers. The annual incidence of stroke is 795,000 [6]. Further, the annual estimate of brain tumors is 64,530, along with 27,000 aneurysms, and 20,000 viral encephalitis cases [68]. No national data are available for anoxic brain injury and other subtypes [1]. When all types of brain injury are aggregated, the annual occurrence in the U.S. approaches 8.5 million.
In addition, brain injuries reach beyond the individual who has sustained the TBI, affecting the lives of loved ones. Grief-stricken families witness trauma, entering a reality in which survival is the daily hope. Improvements in medical care have improved life expectancy, yielding a steady increase in the number of older adults living with a brain injury [9,10].
Once evident that an individual will survive the brain injury, goals focus on regaining lost function or rehabilitation. Just as each individual is unique, so is each recovery. Families commonly observe physical disabilities, impaired learning, and personality changes post injury. Nearly 20 years ago, the National Institutes of Health held a conference wherein an expert panel recommended that patients with TBI receive an individualized rehabilitation program based on the patient’s unique strengths and capacities, and adapted to needs over time. The group further advised that persons with moderate to severe brain injuries have individually tailored treatment programs that draw on the coordinated skills of various specialists [11].
Past research of rehabilitation following brain injury has often focused on the evaluation of a specific treatment modality or of a program’s efficacy as quantified by outcomes measurements. Many studies have sought to determine if rehabilitation has been successful, perhaps to the detriment of learning how rehabilitation has been efficacious. Studying how rehabilitation works over time is important in learning more about the individual and family experience while advancing an understanding of measured functional improvements.
Current research explores the therapies and interventions that facilitate long-term recovery of function. Individuals follow diverse recovery paths because there are a wide variety of options for rehabilitation [12]. This study focuses on Post-Hospital Inter-Disciplinary Brain Injury Rehabilitation – Residential (PHIDBIR-R) programs, which are 24-hour, 7-days a week rehabilitative care programs delivered in non-hospital, home-like, community-based environments. PHIDBIR-R programs strive to implement effective therapeutic interventions, supports, and services that maximize functional gains; these programs are judged on their ability to produce improvements in function [13].
While research efforts have focused on demonstrating positive outcomes, the identification of attributes that contribute to how improvement happens is largely untouched [1318]. Although several PHIDBIR-R programs report positive outcomes [19,20], the empirical evidence is limited and studies habitually focus on quantitative analysis. Including a qualitative component may provide insight into the PHIDBIR-R, eludicating how these experiences advance an understanding of functional improvements. […]

Continue —> Post-Acute Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation Treatment Variables: A Mixed Methods Study

, , , ,

Leave a comment

[Poster] Implementing Best Practices in Cognitive Rehabilitation: What are Rehabilitation Teams’ Priorities and Why?

via Implementing Best Practices in Cognitive Rehabilitation: What are Rehabilitation Teams’ Priorities and Why? – Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

First page of article

This study represents the first step of a knowledge translation initiative to support the implementation of best practices in cognitive rehabilitation post-acquired brain injury (ABI). The objective was to identify rehabilitation teams’ priorities regarding the implementation of best practices in cognitive rehabilitation, as well as the factors influencing decision-making processes about implementation.

, , ,

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: