MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2967254841 · doi:10.1097/phm.0000000000001073

Evidence-Based Physiatry

2018· article· en· W2967254841 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mary Alexis Iaccarino, Sabrina Paganoni, Ross Zafonte

Notice bibliographique

RevueAmerican Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésConcussionMedicineTraumatic brain injuryGuidelineEmergency departmentGlasgow Coma ScaleVeterans AffairsHead injuryPoison controlAthletesInjury preventionPhysical therapyPsychiatryMedical emergency

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) or concussion is the most commonly occurring type of traumatic brain injury in adults and children. Between 2005 and 2009, the United States Center for Disease Control estimated 2–3 million pediatric mTBI-related emergency department and primary care visits occurred. Although there are subtle variation in definitions of mTBI, a consensus has formed around defining this injury as an acute neurological disturbance manifesting with confusion and/or disorientation after a mechanical force to the head and meeting the following parameters: (1) length of loss of consciousness of less than 30 mins; (2) posttraumatic amnesia less than 24 hrs; and (3) a Glasgow Coma Scale of 13–15, 30 mins after injury or at time of presentation to medical care. Guidelines have emerged to direct treatment of specific groups that commonly sustain mTBI, such as the Consensus Statement on Concussion in Sport directed at student athletes, the Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation guidelines for those with mTBI and persistent symptoms, and Veteran’s Affairs/Department of Defense guidelines for mTBI in military service members and veterans. However, evidence based guidelines for pediatric mTBI in the United States were lacking until the most recently published Center for Disease Control Guideline on the Diagnosis and Management of mTBI among Children (https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2018/p0904-tbi-guidelines.html).1 GUIDELINE DEVELOPMENT AND METHODOLOGY The new Center for Disease Control guideline is a set of 19 recommendations based on a systematic review of the literature and expert consensus. Clinical questions were developed by the Pediatric Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Work Group, a panel of experts that included rehabilitation specialists and physiatrists. Guidelines were developed in three clinical areas diagnosis, prognosis, and management/treatment. A systematic review of pediatric mTBI and related topics from 1990 to 2015 was conducted using the American Academy of Neurology Guidelines. Each recommendation was based on evidence obtained in the systematic review as well as other relevant scientific information and expert opinion deemed significant by the work group. This work considered strength of evidence as well as additional factors, such as the risks and benefits of the recommendation, importance of the recommendation, feasibility, patient preference, and financial cost. WHAT ARE THE HIGHLIGHTS IN THE NEW GUIDELINES? These guidelines outline a series of practical and feasible recommendations for emergency department, primary care, and specialty providers focusing on readily available mTBI assessment tools, early identification of poor prognostic factors, and education and active rehabilitation as mainstays of treatment. A complete list of recommendations is located in the guideline supplement and patient and family resources are available online (https://www.cdc.gov/traumaticbraininjury/PediatricmTBIGuideline.html).1 In summary, the guideline recommends against the routine use of neuroimaging or serum based biomarkers for diagnosis of mTBI, except when intracranial injury is suspected. Age-appropriate symptom inventories and computer-based cognitive testing should not be used alone but in conjunction with clinical assessment. In the area of prognosis, the guidelines strongly support education of patients and families about the general course of recovery in pediatric mTBI (1–3 mos) and risk factors that are associated with prolonged recovery (premorbid conditions, injury, and noninjury-related factors). Close monitoring of individuals with multiple risk factors for prolonged symptoms and referral to specialty care within 4–6 weeks of injury if symptoms persist. The guidelines strongly support education of patients and families regarding warning signs in the acute period, the emergence of postconcussive symptoms, prevention of a second, overlapping head injury, and guidance for return to school and activity. Although rest was once the mainstay of concussion treatment, the guideline emphasizes a brief period (2–3 days) of reduced activity in the acute period followed by a gradual return to school and noncontact physical activity that does not exacerbate symptoms. The guideline supports the use of individualized return to school plans based on symptom severity and highlights the importance of a collaborative effort in return to school recommendations. Referral specialists and formal neuropsychological testing is recommended in students struggling with return to school or with persistent cognitive symptoms, respectively. Treatment recommendations focus on multidisciplinary care and dedicated symptom-based treatments for acute and chronic headache, sleep dysfunction, and vestibular and oculomotor symptoms are provided. WHY IS THIS RELEVANT TO PHYSIATRISTS? Physiatrists are uniquely positioned to care for children with mTBI because of their role in leading multidisciplinary rehabilitation teams and their specific clinical expertise in pediatric rehabilitation, sports medicine, and traumatic brain injury. The guideline recommends referral to specialty and rehabilitation care in the early subacute period meaning that the number of children with mTBI referred to specialists, such as physiatry, will likely increase. The guideline supports a paradigm shift in the treatment of mTBI from a rest and recover model to an active rehabilitation, symptom-based approach including physical activity, cognitive activity, and specialized rehabilitation (i.e., vestibular). Such an approach is an ideal forum to leverage physiatric skills.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,993
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,278

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,044
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,004
Bibliométrie0,0050,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0060,003
Science ouverte0,0030,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0830,022

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,059
Tête enseignante GPT0,399
Écart entre enseignants0,340 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
DomaineMéthodes
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAmerican Journal of Physical Medicine & RehabilitationMême sujetTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchTravaux en français237 207