An adaptation pattern characterized by resilience was found to be the most common response to an acquired severe injury, and trait affect predicts the outcome pattern. Interventions based on resilience are discussed.

There are currently no international guidelines regarding treatment in the early rehabilitation phase for persons with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), and only a few studies have investigated the effect of integrating rehabilitation into acute TBI care. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether a continuous chain of rehabilitation that begins with the acute phase could improve the functional outcome of severe TBI patients, compared to a broken chain of rehabilitation that starts in the sub-acute phase of TBI. A total of 61 surviving patients with severe TBI were included in a quasi-experimental study conducted at the Level I trauma center in Eastern Norway. In the study, 31 patients were in the early rehabilitation group (Group A) and 30 patients were in the delayed rehabilitation group (Group B). The functional outcomes were assessed 12 months post-injury with the Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) and the Disability Rating Scale (DRS). A favorable outcome (GOSE 6-8) occurred in 71 % of the patients from Group A versus 37 % in Group B ( p = 0.007). The DRS score was significantly better in Group A ( p = 0.03). The ordinal logistic regression analysis was used to quantify the relationship between the type of rehabilitation chain and the GOSE. A better GOSE outcome was found in patients from Group A (unadjusted OR 3.25 and adjusted OR 2.78, respectively). These results support the hypothesis that better functional outcome occurs in patients who receive early onset and a continuous chain of rehabilitation.

PCS symptoms were reported to a greater degree in persons with mild TBI at 3 months post-injury. One year after injury, no differences were found between TBI groups on the presence of PCS.

The study investigates the correspondence between neuropsychological test results and on-road driving performance among 55 patients with a CT-verified brain damage or documented neurological disorder (cerebrovascular accident: 43, traumatic brain injury: 5, multiple sclerosis: 4, other: 3). 5 patients showed unimpaired test profiles and passed the on-road evaluation. 18 patients showed severe neuropsychological deficits contrary to driving and were not recommended for on-road evaluation. Of the remaining 32 patients with some neuropsychological deficits, all 100% in the minor impaired group (n = 8) passed the driving evaluation, compared to 69% in the mildly impaired (n = 16) and 38% in the moderately impaired group (n = 8). Measures of reduced visuoconstructive ability, reaction time, visual attention, and awareness of cognitive impairments, were found to discriminate between groups. It is concluded that neuropsychological assessment of targeted functions provide an ecological valid prediction of driving skill after brain damage, but that on-road evaluation is needed as supplement in cases with ambiguous test findings.