4.4 Review

Randomized controlled trials in adult traumatic brain injury

Journal

BRAIN INJURY
Volume 26, Issue 13-14, Pages 1523-1548

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/02699052.2012.722257

Keywords

Randomized controlled trial; traumatic brain injury; acute care rehabilitation

Funding

  1. National Institute of Health through the University Center for Translation Science [1UL1RR031990-01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: To optimize strategies for achieving the effectiveness of interdisciplinary interventions, this study conducted a comprehensive literature review of all Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) in adults with traumatic brain injury (TBI) over the past 30 years. Method: Three major databases including Medline, PsycINFO and CINAHL were searched, yielding 1176 peer reviewed publications. One hundred RCTs were included, encompassing 55 pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic acute phase trials and 45 rehabilitation and pharmacologic post-acute trials. Results: The majority of acute phase pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic trials (40/55) showed either no effect or adverse effect on TBI outcomes. Several trials involving early nutritional therapy or pre-hospital rapid intubation demonstrated significant treatment effects. The effect of decompressive craniectomy, therapeutic hypothermia and osmotic therapy remained controversial. The majority of post-acute phase trials (36/45), consisting of cognitive rehabilitation, physical rehabilitation and pharmacotherapy, produced various beneficial treatment effects. Conclusion: The data indicate that several active interventions during the acute phase of TBI are likely to be more effective than pharmacotherapy, whereas a comprehensive rehabilitation approach is preferred in post-acute phase TBI management. Great progress has been made in understanding the heterogeneous injury mechanisms as well as the complexity of medical management and rehabilitation following the recovery course of TBI.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available