1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Development of clinical decision rules for traumatic intracranial injuries in patients with mild traumatic brain injury in a developing country

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The majority of clinical decision rules for prediction of intracranial injury in patients with mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) were developed from high-income countries. The application of these rules in low or middle-income countries, where the primary mechanism of injury was traffic accidents, is questionable.

          Methods

          We developed two practical decision rules from a secondary analysis of a multicenter, prospective cohort of 1,164 patients with mild TBI who visited the emergency departments from 2013 to 2016. The clinical endpoints were the presence of any intracranial injury on CT scans and the requirement of neurosurgical interventions within seven days of onset.

          Results

          Thirteen predictors were included in both models, which were age ≥60 years, dangerous mechanism of injury, diffuse headache, vomiting >2 episodes, loss of consciousness, posttraumatic amnesia, posttraumatic seizure, history of anticoagulant use, presence of neurological deficits, significant wound at the scalp, signs of skull base fracture, palpable stepping at the skull, and GCS <15 at 2 hours. For the model-based score, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AuROC) was 0.85 (95%CI 0.82, 0.87) for positive CT results and 0.87 (95%CI 0.83, 0.91) for requirement of neurosurgical intervention. For the clinical-based score, the AuROC for positive CT results and requirement of neurosurgical intervention was 0.82 (95%CI 0.79, 0.85) and 0.84 (95%CI 0.80, 0.88), respectively.

          Conclusions

          The models delivered good calibration and excellent discrimination both in the development and internal validation cohort. These rules can be used as assisting tools in risk stratification of patients with mild TBI to be sent for CT scans or admitted for clinical observation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Indications for computed tomography in patients with minor head injury.

          Computed tomography (CT) is widely used as a screening test in patients with minor head injury, although the results are often normal. We performed a study to develop and validate a set of clinical criteria that could be used to identify patients with minor head injury who do not need to undergo CT. In the first phase of the study, we recorded clinical findings in 520 consecutive patients with minor head injury who had a normal score on the Glasgow Coma Scale and normal findings on a brief neurologic examination; the patients then underwent CT. Using recursive partitioning, we derived a set of criteria to identify all patients who had abnormalities on CT scanning. In the second phase, the sensitivity and specificity of the criteria for predicting a positive scan were evaluated in a group of 909 patients. Of the 520 patients in the first phase, 36 (6.9 percent) had positive scans. All patients with positive CT scans had one or more of seven findings: headache, vomiting, an age over 60 years, drug or alcohol intoxication, deficits in short-term memory, physical evidence of trauma above the clavicles, and seizure. Among the 909 patients in the second phase, 57 (6.3 percent) had positive scans. In this group of patients, the sensitivity of the seven findings combined was 100 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 95 to 100 percent). All patients with positive CT scans had at least one of the findings. For the evaluation of patients with minor head injury, the use of CT can be safely limited to those who have certain clinical findings.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The Canadian CT Head Rule for patients with minor head injury

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Clinical prediction rules. A review and suggested modifications of methodological standards.

              Clinical prediction rules are decision-making tools for clinicians, containing variables from the history, physical examination, or simple diagnostic tests. To review the quality of recently published clinical prediction rules and to suggest methodological standards for their development and evaluation. Four general medical journals were manually searched for clinical prediction rules published from 1991 through 1994. Four hundred sixty potentially eligible reports were identified, of which 30 were clinical prediction rules eligible for study. Most methodological standards could only be evaluated in 29 studies. Two investigators independently evaluated the quality of each report using a standard data sheet. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. The mathematical technique was used to develop the rule, and the results of the rule were described in 100% (29/29) of the reports. All the rules but 1 (97% [28/29]) were felt to be clinically sensible. The outcomes and predictive variables were clearly defined in 83% (24/29) and 59% (17/29) of the reports, respectively. Blind assessment of outcomes and predictive variables occurred in 41% (12/29) and 79% (23/29) of the reports, respectively, and the rules were prospectively validated in 79% (11/14). Reproducibility of predictive variables was assessed in only 3% (1/29) of the reports, and the effect of the rule on clinical use was prospectively measured in only 3% (1/30). Forty-one percent (12/29) of the rules were felt to be easy to use. Although clinical prediction rules comply with some methodological criteria, for other criteria, better compliance is needed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: InvestigationRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: Supervision
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                18 September 2020
                2020
                : 15
                : 9
                : e0239082
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
                [2 ] Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
                [3 ] Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Clinical Statistics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
                [4 ] Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand
                Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, ISRAEL
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0559-3023
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8543-6254
                Article
                PONE-D-20-17284
                10.1371/journal.pone.0239082
                7500687
                a70a62d7-9c63-417c-971c-08e48c513e16
                © 2020 Vaniyapong et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 7 June 2020
                : 28 August 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 5, Pages: 17
                Funding
                The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Imaging Techniques
                Neuroimaging
                Computed Axial Tomography
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Neuroimaging
                Computed Axial Tomography
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Diagnostic Medicine
                Diagnostic Radiology
                Tomography
                Computed Axial Tomography
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Imaging Techniques
                Diagnostic Radiology
                Tomography
                Computed Axial Tomography
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Radiology and Imaging
                Diagnostic Radiology
                Tomography
                Computed Axial Tomography
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Critical Care and Emergency Medicine
                Trauma Medicine
                Traumatic Injury
                Neurotrauma
                Traumatic Brain Injury
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Epidemiology
                Medical Risk Factors
                Traumatic Injury Risk Factors
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Traumatic Injury Risk Factors
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Anatomy
                Musculoskeletal System
                Skeleton
                Skull
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Anatomy
                Musculoskeletal System
                Skeleton
                Skull
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Mathematical and Statistical Techniques
                Statistical Methods
                Forecasting
                Physical Sciences
                Mathematics
                Statistics
                Statistical Methods
                Forecasting
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Anatomy
                Head
                Scalp
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Anatomy
                Head
                Scalp
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Critical Care and Emergency Medicine
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Amnesia
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article