Outcome after traumatic brain injury (TBI) depends on the extent of primary cell death and on the development of secondary brain injury. The general aim of this thesis was to find strategies and quality systems to minimize the extent of secondary insults in neurointensive care (NIC).An established standardized management protocol system, multimodality monitoring and computerized data collection, and analysis systems were used.The Uppsala TBI register was established for regular monitoring of NIC quality indexes. For 2008-2010 the proportion of patients improving during NIC was 60-80%, whereas 10% deteriorated. The percentage of ‘talk and die’ cases was 25 mmHg, cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) < 50 mmHg and systolic blood pressure < 100 mmHg. Favorable outcome was achieved by 64% of adults.Nurse checklists of secondary insult occurrence were introduced. Evaluation of the use of nursing checklists showed that the nurses documented their assessments in 84-85% of the shifts and duration of monitoring time at insult level was significantly longer when secondary insults were reported regarding ICP, CPP and temperature. The use of nurse checklist was found to be feasible and accurate. A clinical tool to avoid secondary insults related to nursing interventions was developed. Secondary brain insults occurred in about 10% of nursing interventions. There were substantial variations between patients. The risk ratios of developing an ICP insult were 4.7 when baseline ICP ≥ 15 mmHg, 2.9 when ICP amplitude ≥ 6 mmHg and 1.7 when pressure autoregulation ≥ 0.3.Hyperthermia, which is a known frequent secondary insult, was studied. Hyperthermia was most common on Day 7 after admission and 90% of the TBI patients had hyperthermia during the first 10 days at the NIC unit. The effects of hyperthermia on intracranial dynamics (ICP, brain energy metabolism and BtipO2) were small but individual differences were observed. Hyperthermia increased ICP slightly more when temperature increased in the groups with low compliance and impaired pressure autoregulation. Ischemic pattern was never observed in the microdialysis samples. The treatment of hyperthermia may be individualized and guided by multimodality monitoring.

To assess the use of hyperventilation and the adherence to Brain Trauma Foundation-Guidelines (BTF-G) after traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Studies of therapeutic interventions and management strategies on head injured patients are difficult to undertake. BrainIT provides validated data for analysis available to centers that contribute data to allow post-hoc analysis and hypothesis testing.

Background. BrainIT is a multi centre, European project, to collect high quality continuous data from severely head injured patients using a previously defined [6] core data set. This includes minute-by-minute physiological data and simultaneous treatment and management information. It is crucial that the data is correctly collected and validated.Methods. Minute-by-minute physiological monitoring data is collected from the bedside monitors. Demographic and clinical information, intensive care management and secondary insult management data, are collected using a handheld computer. Data is transferred from the handheld device to a local computer where it is reviewed and anonymised before being sent electronically, with the physiological data, to the central database in Glasgow. Automated computer tools highlight missing or ambiguous data. A request is then sent to the contributing centre where the data is amended and returned to Glasgow. Of the required data elements 20% are randomly selected for validation against original documentation along with the actual number of specific episodic events during a known period. This will determine accuracy and the percentage of missing data for each record.Conclusion. Advances in patient care require an improved evidence base. For accurate, consistent and repeatable data collection, robust mechanisms are required which should enhance the reliability of clinical trials, assessment of management protocols and equipment evaluations.

The aim of this study was to obtain basic knowledge about the current local conditions and neurointensive care of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in the new multi-centre collaborative BrainIT group.

OBJECT:The aim of this study was to compare the effects of two different treatment protocols on physiological characteristics and outcome in patients with brain trauma. One protocol was primarily oriented toward reducing intracranial pressure (ICP), and the other primarily on maintaining cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP). METHODS:A series of 67 patients in Uppsala were treated according to a protocol aimed at keeping ICP less than 20 mm Hg and, as a secondary target, CPP at approximately 60 mm Hg. Another series of 64 patients in Edinburgh were treated according to a protocol aimed primarily at maintaining CPP greater than 70 mm Hg and, secondarily, ICP less than 25 mm Hg for the first 24 hours and 30 mm Hg subsequently. The ICP and CPP insults were assessed as the percentage of monitoring time that ICP was greater than or equal to 20 mm Hg and CPP less than 60 mm Hg, respectively. Pressure reactivity in each patient was assessed based on the slope of the regression line relating mean arterial blood pressure (MABP) to ICP. Outcome was analyzed at 6 months according to the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS). The prognostic value of secondary insults and pressure reactivity was determined using linear methods and a neural network. In patients treated according to the CPP-oriented protocol, even short durations of CPP insults were strong predictors of death. In patients treated according to the ICP-oriented protocol, even long durations of CPP insult-mostly in the range of 50 to 60 mm Hg--were significant predictors of favorable outcome (GOS Score 4 or 5). Among those who had undergone ICP-oriented treatment, pressure-passive patients (MABP/ICP slope > or = 0.13) had a better outcome. Among those who had undergone CPP-oriented treatment, the more pressure-active (MABP/ICP slope < 0.13) patients had a better outcome. CONCLUSION:Based on data from this study, the authors concluded that ICP-oriented therapy should be used in patients whose slope of the MABP/ICP regression line is at least 0.13, that is, in pressure-passive patients. If the slope is less than 0.13, then hypertensive CPP therapy is likely to produce a better outcome.

INTRODUCTION:An open collaborative international network has been established which aims to improve inter-centre standards for collection of high-resolution, neurointensive care data on patients with traumatic brain injury. The group is also working towards the creation of an open access, detailed and validated database that will be useful for hypothesis generation. In Part A, we describe the underlying concept of the group and it's aims and in Part B we describe the current status of the groups development.METHODS:Four group meetings funded by the EEC have enabled definition of a "Core Dataset" to be collected from all centres regardless of specific project aim. A form based feasibility study was conducted and a prospective data collection exercise of core data using PC and hand held computer based methods is in progress.FINDINGS:A core-dataset was defined and can be downloaded from the BrainIT web-site (go to "Core dataset" link at: www.brainit.org). A form based feasibility study was conducted showing the overall feasibility for collection of the core data elements was high. Software tools for collection of the core dataset have been developed. Currently, 130 patient's data from 16 European centres have been recruited to the joint database as part of an EEC funded proof of concept study.INTERPRETATION:The BrainIT network provides a more standardised and higher resolution data collection mechanism for research groups, organisations and the device industry to conduct multicentre trials of new health care technology in patients with traumatic brain injury.

OBJECTIVE:To obtain knowledge about the conditions and management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in a collaborative network of Brain Information Technology centres.DESIGN:The Brain IT (Brain monitoring with Information Technology) survey comprised two parts: local conditions and policies (part A), and a case study part (part B). The information was gathered by written questionnaires followed by telephone interviews.PARTICIPANTS:Twenty-four Brain IT centres participated (two respondents from 18 sites).RESULTS:The average proportion of agreement between duplicate respondents was 0.79 (range 0.44-1.00). All Brain IT centres monitored ICP. The reported order of treatment for intracranial hypertension was: evacuation of mass-lesions and head elevation (1), increase of sedation and Mannitol scheme (2), hyperventilation (3), ventricular drainage (4), craniectomy and pentothal coma (5), and decompressive lobectomy (6). The respondents were less prone to evacuate expansive contusions in relation to extra cerebral hematomas. The most common suggested interventions (alone or in combination) for treatment of intracranial hypertension without mass lesions was the Mannitol scheme (included in 71% of the suggestions), CSF drainage (included in 56%), hyperventilation (included in 32%), and pentothal coma (included in 22%).CONCLUSIONS:The suggested management of TBI was mainly in accordance with published guidelines, although a minor proportion of the answers deviated to some extent. The suggested order and combinations of different treatment interventions varied. Variation of treatment within the range of prescribed standards provides optimal conditions for an interesting future analysis of treatment and monitoring data as collected prospectively in a Brain IT database.

Introduction. An open collaborative international network has been established which aims to improve inter-centre standards for collection of high-resolution, neurointensive care data on patients with traumatic brain injury. The group is also working towards the creation of an open access, detailed and validated database that will be useful for post-hoc hypothesis testing. In Part A, the underlying concept, the group coordination structure, membership guidelines and database access and publication criteria are described. Secondly, in part B, we describe a set of meetings funded by the EEC that allowed us to define a "Core Dataset" and we present the results of a feasibility exercise for collection of this core dataset.Methods. Four group meetings funded by the EEC have enabled definition of a "Core Dataset" to be collected from all centres regardless of specific project aim. A paper based pilot collection of data was conducted to determine the feasibility for collection of the core dataset. Specially designed forms to collect the core dataset demographic and clinical information as well as sample the time-series data elements were distributed by both email and standard mail to 22 BrainIT centres. A deadline of two months was set to receive completed forms back from centres. A pilot data collection of minute by minute physiological monitoring data was also performed.Findings. A core-dataset was defined and can be downloaded from the BrainIT web-site (go to "Core dataset" link at: www.brainit.org). Eighteen centres (82%) returned completed forms by the set deadline. Overall the feasibility for collection of the core data elements was high with only 10 of the 64 questions (16%) showing missing data. Of those 10 fields with missing data, the average number of centres not responding was 12% and the median 6%. An SQL database to hold the data has been designed and is being tested. Software tools for collection of the core dataset have been developed. Ethics approval has been granted for collection of multi-centre data as part of a pilot data collection study.Interpretation. The BrainIT network provides a more standardised and higher resolution data collection mechanism for research groups, organisations and the device industry to conduct multi-centre trials of new health care technology in patients with traumatic brain injury.