Taking a developmental and systemic perspective on neuropsychological rehabilitation with children with brain injury and their families

Abstract

This paper reviews current approaches and models in the neuropsychological rehabilitation of children following Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and cites a large evidence base for a developmental and family systems perspective to neuropsychological rehabilitation of children post-TBI. The paper describes the application and efficacy of a systemic and developmental perspective to rehabilitation of children with TBI, with a clinical case example of this approach. The paper describes the development of a community-based child neuropsychology rehabilitation service integrating applied developmental neuropsychology and systems ideas as a way of working effectively with children with TBI and their families.

Caregivers’ voices: The experiences of caregivers of children who sustained serious accidental and non-accidental head injury in early childhood

“…Such an analysis coupled with a review of evidence-based practice and interviews with key stakeholders could inform the development of a standard model of care, the expansion of existing services as required, and provide a baseline for monitoring subsequent improvements. Byard et al (2011) describe the development of a community-based child neuropsychology rehabilitation service in the United Kingdom based on an extensive review of the published literature. The service has adopted a developmental neuropsychology approach to effectively work with children with head injury and their families.…”

“…Head injury is a leading cause of mortality and acquired neurological impairment in children (Byard, Fine, & Reed, 2011; Feigin et al, 2013; Kraus, Rock, & Hemyari, 1990; Langlois, Rutland-Brown, & Wald, 2006; Parslow, Morris, Tasker, Forsyth, & Hawley, 2005). In New Zealand (NZ), about one-third of the population will sustain a serious head injury by 25 years of age (McKinlay et al, 2008).…”

“…Despite the potential for very long-term impacts of head injury, healthcare systems are traditionally designed to respond to acute illness, not to chronic conditions (Wagner, Austin, & Von Korff, 1996). The lack of long-term rehabilitation services means the on-going care and support of head-injured victims typically falls on family members (Byard et al, 2011; Serio, Kreutzer, & Gervasio, 1995; Von Korff, Gruman, Schaefer, Curry, & Wagner, 1997; Wells, Dywan, & Dumas, 2005). They provide emotional and financial support, housing and advocacy, facilitate rehabilitation and communication with agencies and identify service needs and providers, and this can be associated with a range of psychological difficulties (Bull, 1990; Carnwath & Johnson, 1987; Ergh, Rapport, Coleman, & Hanks, 2002).…”

“…There is an evolving body of research on the impact of childhood head injury on families (Anderson, Catroppa, Haritou, Morse, & Rosenfeld, 2005; Bedell, Cohn, & Dumas, 2005; Byard et al, 2011; Clark et al, 2008; Gan, Campbell, Gemeinhardt, & McFadden, 2006; Rivara et al, 1996; Wade, Taylor, Drotar, Stancin, & Yeates, 1998) but little on the impact of head injury in infancy (Jones, Hocking, & Wright-St Clair, 2010). This information is vital for the planning of effective accessible and equitable head injury services.…”

Reflections on the physical, executive developmental and systems applied framework in child neuropsychological rehabilitation

“…The Physical, Executive, Developmental and Systems (PEDS) applied framework (Byard et al, 2011) emphasised a PEDS perspective in the assessment, formulation, planning and delivery of child rehabilitation in the community. Through the four components of PEDS, it was intended to (1) understand and capture more of the complex and contextual consequences of childhood brain injury on the developing brain, and on the child and family over time, and (2) begin to provide a framework of key elements to support the planning and delivery of community-based rehabilitation.…”