This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 22, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
ImportanceTrauma is a global disease and is among the leading causes of disability in the world. The importance of outcome beyond trauma survival has been recognised over the last decade. Despite this there is no internationally agreed approach for assessment of health outcome and rehabilitation of trauma patients.ObjectiveTo systematically examine to what extent outcomes measures evaluate health outcomes in patients with major trauma.Data SourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL (from 2006–2012) were searched for studies evaluating health outcome after traumatic injuries.Study selection and data extractionStudies of adult patients with injuries involving at least two body areas or organ systems were included. Information on study design, outcome measures used, sample size and outcomes were extracted. The World Health Organisation International Classification of Function, Disability and Health (ICF) were used to evaluate to what extent outcome measures captured health impacts.Results34 studies from 755 studies were included in the review. 38 outcome measures were identified. 21 outcome measures were used only once and only five were used in three or more studies. Only 6% of all possible health impacts were captured. Concepts related to activity and participation were the most represented but still only captured 12% of all possible concepts in this domain. Measures performed very poorly in capturing concepts related to body function (5%), functional activities (11%) and environmental factors (2%).ConclusionOutcome measures used in major trauma capture only a small proportion of health impacts. There is no inclusive classification for measuring disability or health outcome following trauma. The ICF may provide a useful framework for the development of a comprehensive health outcome measure for trauma care.
Background: Multiple trauma is a cause of significant disability in adults of working age. Despite the implementation of trauma systems for improved coordination and organization of care, rehabilitation services are not yet routinely considered integral to trauma care processes. Results: No randomized and/or controlled clinical trials were identified. Fifteen observational studies involving 2386 participants with injuries were included. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach assessed methodological quality as 'poor' in all studies, with selection and observer bias. Although patients with low functional scores showed improvement after rehabilitation, they were unable to resume their pretrauma level of activity. Their functional ability was significantly associated with motor independence on admission and early acute rehabilitation, which contributed to a shorter hospital stay. Injury location, age, co-morbidity and education predicted long-term functional consequences. Trauma care systems were associated with reduced mortality. The gaps in evidence include: rehabilitation settings, components, intensity, duration and types of therapy, and long-term outcomes for survivors of multiple trauma. Conclusion:Rehabilitation is an expensive resource and the evidence to support its justification is needed urgently. The issues in study design and research methodology in rehabilitation are challenging. Opportunities to prioritize trauma rehabilitation, disability management and social reintegration of multiple injury survivors are discussed.
BackgroundOver one million people sustain traumatic brain injury each year in the UK and more than 10 % of these are moderate or severe injuries, resulting in cognitive and psychological problems that affect the ability to work. Returning to work is a primary rehabilitation goal but fewer than half of traumatic brain injury survivors achieve this. Work is a recognised health service outcome, yet UK service provision varies widely and there is little robust evidence to inform rehabilitation practice. A single-centre cohort comparison suggested better work outcomes may be achieved through early occupational therapy targeted at job retention. This study aims to determine whether this intervention can be delivered in three new trauma centres and to conduct a feasibility, randomised controlled trial to determine whether its effects and cost effectiveness can be measured to inform a definitive trial.Methods/designMixed methods study, including feasibility randomised controlled trial, embedded qualitative studies and feasibility economic evaluation will recruit 102 people with traumatic brain injury and their nominated carers from three English UK National Health Service (NHS) trauma centres. Participants will be randomised to receive either usual NHS rehabilitation or usual rehabilitation plus early specialist traumatic brain injury vocational rehabilitation delivered by an occupational therapist. The primary objective is to assess the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial; secondary objectives include measurement of protocol integrity (inclusion/exclusion criteria, intervention adherence, reasons for non-adherence) recruitment rate, the proportion of eligible patients recruited, reasons for non-recruitment, spectrum of TBI severity, proportion of and reasons for loss to follow-up, completeness of data collection, gains in face-to-face Vs postal data collection and the most appropriate methods of measuring primary outcomes (return to work, retention) to determine the sample size for a larger trial.DiscussionTo our knowledge, this is the first feasibility randomised controlled trial of a vocational rehabilitation health intervention specific to traumatic brain injury. The results will inform the design of a definitive trial.Trial registrationThe trial is registered ISRCTN Number 38581822.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40814-015-0017-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.