Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the leading cause of death and disability in trauma patients, and can be classified into mild, moderate, and severe by the Glasgow coma scale (GCS). Prehospital, initial emergency department, and subsequent intensive care unit (ICU) management of severe TBI should focus on avoiding secondary brain injury from hypotension and hypoxia, with appropriate reversal of anticoagulation and surgical evacuation of mass lesions as indicated. Utilizing principles based on the Monro–Kellie doctrine and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP), a surrogate for cerebral blood flow (CBF) should be maintained by optimizing mean arterial pressure (MAP), through fluids and vasopressors, and/or decreasing intracranial pressure (ICP), through bedside maneuvers, sedation, hyperosmolar therapy, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage, and, in refractory cases, barbiturate coma or decompressive craniectomy (DC). While controversial, direct ICP monitoring, in conjunction with clinical examination and imaging as indicated, should help guide severe TBI therapy, although new modalities, such as brain tissue oxygen (PbtO2) monitoring, show great promise in providing strategies to optimize CBF. Optimization of the acute care of severe TBI should include recognition and treatment of paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity (PSH), early seizure prophylaxis, venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, and nutrition optimization. Despite this, severe TBI remains a devastating injury and palliative care principles should be applied early. To better affect the challenging long-term outcomes of severe TBI, more and continued high quality research is required.

Student-run free clinics (SRFCs) serve uninsured patients and offer unique educational opportunities. However, the impact of these clinics on hospital utilization is unclear. In this pre-post observational study, we used multivariable modeling to test the hypothesis that patients of Shade Tree Clinic, the SRFC affiliated with Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), would have decreased hospital utilization after joining the clinic. To evaluate the relationship between STC and VUMC, we conducted a sub-analysis of patients referred to Shade Tree from VUMC using univariate Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Multivariable analysis showed patients were less likely to be hospitalized after joining Shade Tree (p=.04). Univariate analysis showed differences in hospitalizations among patients referred from VUMC (p=.02). These results suggest that Shade Tree does not result in an additional burden on the health care system and may reduce hospital utilization. Additional research with control populations may further highlight the effect of SRFCs on health care utilization.

Background While understanding of critical illness and delirium continue to evolve, the impact on clinical practice is often unknown and delayed. Our purpose was to provide insight into practice changes by characterizing analgesia and sedation usage and occurrence of delirium in different years and international regions. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of two multicenter, international, prospective cohort studies. Mechanically ventilated adults were followed for up to 28 days in 2010 and 2016. Proportion of days utilizing sedation, analgesia, and performance of a spontaneous awakening trial (SAT), and occurrence of delirium were described for each year and region and compared between years. Results A total of 14,281 patients from 6 international regions were analyzed. Proportion of days utilizing analgesia and sedation increased from 2010 to 2016 ( p < 0.001 for each). Benzodiazepine use decreased in every region but remained the most common sedative in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Performance of SATs increased overall, driven mostly by the US/Canada region (24 to 35% of days with sedation, p < 0.001). Any delirium during admission increased from 7 to 8% of patients overall and doubled in the US/Canada region (17 to 36%, p < 0.001). Conclusions Analgesia and sedation practices varied widely across international regions and significantly changed over time. Opportunities for improvement in care include increasing delirium monitoring, performing SATs, and decreasing use of sedation, particularly benzodiazepines. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40560-019-0379-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the health utility states of the most commonly used traumatic brain injury (TBI) clinical trial endpoint, the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE). Summary Background Data: Health utilities represent the strength of one's preferences under conditions of uncertainty. There are insufficient data to indicate how an individual would value levels of disability after a TBI. Methods: This was a cross-sectional web-based online convenience sampling adaptive survey. Using a standard gamble approach, participants evaluated their preferences for GOSE health states 1 year after a hypothetical TBI. The categorical GOSE was studied from vegetative state (GOSE2) to upper good recovery (GOSE8). Median (25th percentile, 75th percentile) health utility values for different GOSE states after TBI, ranging from −1 (worse than death) to 1 (full health), with 0 as reference (death). Results: Of 3508 eligible participants, 3235 (92.22%) completed the survey. Participants rated lower GOSE states as having lower utility, with some states rated as worse than death, though the relationship was nonlinear and intervals were unequal between health states. Over 75% of participants rated a vegetative state (GOSE2, absence of awareness and bedridden) and about 50% rated lower severe disability (GOSE3, housebound needing all-day assistance) as conditions worse than death. Conclusions: In the largest investigation of public perceptions about post-TBI disability, we demonstrate unequally rated health states, with some states perceived as worse than death. Although limited by selection bias, these results may guide future comparative-effectiveness research and shared medical decision-making after neurologic injury.

BackgroundPrior retrospective cross-sectional work has associated antimicrobials with a non-specific phrase: encephalopathy without seizures. The purpose of this study is to determine whether different classes of antimicrobials have differential associations with the daily risk of delirium after critical illness is adjusted for.MethodsOur study was a nested cohort that enrolled non-neurological critically ill adults from a medical or surgical intensive care unit (ICU) with daily follow-up to 30 days. Our independent variable was exposure to previous-day antimicrobial class: beta-lactams (subclasses: penicillins, first- to third-generation cephalosporins, fourth-generation cephalosporins, and carbapenems), macrolides, fluoroquinolones, and other. We adjusted for baseline covariates (age, comorbidities, cognition scores, sepsis, and mechanical ventilation), previous-day covariates (delirium, doses of analgesics/sedatives, and antipsychotic use), and same-day covariates (illness severity). Our primary outcome of delirium was measured by using the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU. A daily delirium logistic regression model was used with an ICU time-restricted sensitivity analysis including daily adjustment for sepsis and mechanical ventilation.ResultsOf 418 ICU patients, delirium occurred in 308 (74%) with a median of 3 days (interquartile range 2–6) among those affected and 318 (76%) were exposed to antimicrobials. When covariates and ICU type were adjusted for, only first- to third-generation cephalosporins were associated with delirium (logistic regression model odds ratio (OR) = 2.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.28–3.79, P = 0.004; sensitivity analysis OR = 2.13, 95% CI 1.10–4.10, P = 0.024).ConclusionsFirst-, second-, and third-generation cephalosporins doubled the odds of delirium after baseline co-morbidities, ICU type, the course of critical care, and other competing antimicrobial and psychotropic medication risks were adjusted for. We did not find an association between delirium and cefepime, penicillins, carbapenems, fluoroquinolones, or macrolides.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-018-2262-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective To evaluate the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of combined adrenergic blockade with propranolol and clonidine in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Background Administration of adrenergic blockade after severe TBI is common. To date, no prospective trial has rigorously evaluated this common therapy for benefit. Methods This phase II, single-center, double-blinded, pilot randomized placebo-controlled trial included patients aged 16–64 years with severe TBI (intracranial hemorrhage and Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤ 8) within 24 h of ICU admission. Patients received propranolol and clonidine or double placebo for 7 days. The primary outcome was ventilator-free days (VFDs) at 28 days. Secondary outcomes included catecholamine levels, hospital length of stay, mortality, and long-term functional status. A planned futility assessment was performed mid-study. Results Dose compliance was 99%, blinding was intact, and no open-label agents were used. No treatment patient experienced dysrhythmia, myocardial infarction, or cardiac arrest. The study was stopped for futility after enrolling 47 patients (26 placebo, 21 treatment), per a priori stopping rules. There was no significant difference in VFDs between treatment and control groups [0.3 days, 95% CI (− 5.4, 5.8), p = 1.0]. Other than improvement of features related to sympathetic hyperactivity (mean difference in Clinical Features Scale (CFS) 1.7 points, CI (0.4, 2.9), p = 0.012), there were no between-group differences in the secondary outcomes. Conclusion Despite the safety and feasibility of adrenergic blockade with propranolol and clonidine after severe TBI, the intervention did not alter the VFD outcome. Given the widespread use of these agents in TBI care, a multi-center investigation is warranted to determine whether adrenergic blockade is of therapeutic benefit in patients with severe TBI. Trial Registration Number NCT01322048.