Article-P227.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CLINICAL ARTICLE J Neurosurg Pediatr 23:227–235, 2019 North American survey on the post-neuroimaging management of children with mild head injuries Jacob K. Greenberg, MD, MSCI,1 Donna B. Jeffe, PhD,2 Christopher R. Carpenter, MD, MSc,3 Yan Yan, MD, PhD,4 Jose A. Pineda, MD,5,6 Angela Lumba-Brown, MD,7 Martin S. Keller, MD,4 Daniel Berger, BA,1 Robert J. Bollo, MD, MS,8 Vijay M. Ravindra, MD, MSPH,8 Robert P. Naftel, MD,9 Michael C. Dewan, MD, MSCI,9 Manish N. Shah, MD,10 Erin C. Burns, MD,11 Brent R. O’Neill, MD,12 Todd C. Hankinson, MD,12 William E. Whitehead, MD, MPH,13 P. David Adelson, MD,14 Mandeep S. Tamber, MD, PhD,15 Patrick J. McDonald, MD, MHSc,16 Edward S. Ahn, MD,17 William Titsworth, MD,17 Alina N. West, MD, PhD,18 Ross C. Brownson, PhD,4,19,20 and David D. Limbrick Jr., MD, PhD1 Departments of 1Neurological Surgery, 2Medicine, 4Surgery, 5Pediatrics, and 6Neurology, 3Division of Emergency Medicine, 19Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, and 20Prevention Research Center, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Missouri; 7Department of Emergency Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California; 8Department of Neurosurgery, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah; 9Department of Neurological Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee; 10Department of Neurosurgery, McGovern Medical School at University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas; 11Department of Pediatrics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; 12Department of Neurosurgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado; 13Department of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas; 14Barrow Neurological Institute at Phoenix Children’s Hospital, Phoenix, Arizona; 15Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; 16Division of Neurosurgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; 17Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and 18Department of Pediatrics, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee OBJECTIVE There remains uncertainty regarding the appropriate level of care and need for repeating neuroimaging among children with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) complicated by intracranial injury (ICI). This study’s objective was to investigate physician practice patterns and decision-making processes for these patients in order to identify knowl- edge gaps and highlight avenues for future investigation. METHODS The authors surveyed residents, fellows, and attending physicians from the following pediatric specialties: emergency medicine; general surgery; neurosurgery; and critical care. Participants came from 10 institutions in the United States and an email list maintained by the Canadian Neurosurgical Society. The survey asked respondents to indicate management preferences for and experiences with children with mTBI complicated by ICI, focusing on an exem- plar clinical vignette of a 7-year-old girl with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15 and a 5-mm subdural hematoma without midline shift after a fall down stairs. RESULTS The response rate was 52% (n = 536). Overall, 326 (61%) respondents indicated they would recommend ICU admission for the child in the vignette. However, only 62 (12%) agreed/strongly agreed that this child was at high risk of neurological decline. Half of respondents (45%; n = 243) indicated they would order a planned follow-up CT (29%; n = 155) or MRI scan (19%; n = 102), though only 64 (12%) agreed/strongly agreed that repeat neuroimaging would influ- ence their management. Common factors that increased the likelihood of ICU admission included presence of a focal neurological deficit (95%; n = 508 endorsed), midline shift (90%; n = 480) or an epidural hematoma (88%; n = 471). However, 42% (n = 225) indicated they would admit all children with mTBI and ICI to the ICU. Notably, 27% (n = 143) of respondents indicated they had seen one or more children with mTBI and intracranial hemorrhage demonstrate a rapid ABBREVIATIONS ED = emergency department; GCS = Glasgow Coma Scale; ICI = intracranial injury; ICU = intensive care unit; mTBI = mild TBI; OR = odds ratio; TBI = traumatic brain injury. SUBMITTED May 14, 2018. ACCEPTED July 26, 2018. INCLUDE WHEN CITING Published online October 26, 2018; DOI: 10.3171/2018.7.PEDS18263. ©AANS 2019, except where prohibited by US copyright law J Neurosurg Pediatr Volume 23 • February 2019 227 Unauthenticated | Downloaded 09/25/21 07:12 PM UTC Greenberg et al. neurological decline when admitted to a general ward in the last year, and 13% (n = 71) had witnessed this outcome at least twice in the past year. CONCLUSIONS Many physicians endorse ICU admission and repeat neuroimaging for pediatric mTBI with ICI, despite uncertainty regarding the clinical utility of those decisions. These results, combined with evidence that existing practice may provide insufficient monitoring to some high-risk children, emphasize the need for validated decision tools to aid the management of these patients. https://thejns.org/doi/abs/10.3171/2018.7.PEDS18263 KEYWORDS traumatic brain injury; health services research; clinical decision making; survey research; intracranial injury; trauma EAD trauma is a leading public health issue af- United States and from an email registry maintained by fecting children, causing approximately 600,000 the Canadian Neurosurgical Society (see the Appendix emergency department (ED) visits and up to for a list of participating institutions). These centers were H60,000 hospitalizations each year in the United States.6,34 identified in part by solicitation at a meeting of the Pediat- Healthcare encounters for traumatic brain injury (TBI) are ric Neurocritical Care Research Group. Study participants increasing; the rate of ED visits for TBI increased more included attending and fellow physicians from the follow- than 8 times faster than the rate of overall ED visits be- ing pediatric disciplines involved in the care of mTBI: tween 2006–2010.10,35 Generally characterized with a pre- emergency medicine, general surgery, neurosurgery, and senting Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 13–15,9 mild critical care. Senior (PGY-4 and above) general surgery TBI (mTBI) accounts for more than 90% of new TBI diag- and neurosurgery residents were also surveyed. noses and represents an increasingly important subtype of TBI management.10,30,35 Survey Development Substantial research has been dedicated to identifying Following standard survey methods,29 we used litera- which children with mTBI should undergo acute head CT ture review and input from a team of experts in clinical imaging. With the goal of reducing the substantial varia- 33,37,41 TBI practice and survey methodologies to develop a 50- tions in head CT utilization, 3 independent decision item questionnaire to survey physicians about their at- tools were developed and validated in multicenter studies; titudes and practices in the post-neuroimaging manage- these tools have significantly improved evidence-based 4,13,32,38 ment of pediatric mTBI. Subsequently, we engaged in guidance regarding mTBI imaging decisions. incremental evaluation and refinement of this preliminary Comparatively less attention has been focused on the tool, given the importance of pretesting in improving post-CT acute management of children with mTBI, includ- questionnaire quality.11 First, detailed cognitive interviews ing key questions such as the appropriate level of care and were conducted with 8 clinical experts in pediatric mTBI role of repeat neuroimaging. These questions have partic- who were not part of the research team.24,25 During these ular salience in the management of children with mTBI interviews, clinicians completed and provided feedback complicated by intracranial injury (ICI), where available on the survey, including explaining what they thought the evidence suggests that admission practices vary across questions meant and how they arrived at their responses. specialties and that level-of-care decisions often fail to cor- 18,42 Participants were paid $50. relate with patients’ evidence-based risk. While there After the survey was revised on the basis of these in- are emerging evidence-based tools to help guide level-of- 18 terviews, a pilot study of the same specialties listed above care decisions, it remains unclear what considerations was conducted at Washington University School of Medi- currently influence physician decision making in this cine. Respondents were entered to win one of four $50 population. Likewise, there remains ongoing debate and prizes. Out of 134 surveys emailed, 68 were returned. Pilot uncertainty regarding the role of and indications for repeat 16,21,23,39 data were examined to gauge response rates and to iden- neuroimaging in the management of these patients. tify questions with minimal variability in responses (e.g., Survey studies offer an efficient means of describing nearly all respondents agreed/strongly agreed), which current practice, identifying knowledge gaps, and high- were often dropped. Based on multidisciplinary review of lighting areas requiring further investigation.7,31 With these the pilot data, a final survey was developed. The survey motivations, we conducted a survey to characterize cur- development is detailed in Fig. 1. rent practice patterns and identify influences on physician decision making in the post-neuroimaging acute care of Measures children