Measuring the burden of secondary insults in head-injured patients during intensive care.

Primary traumatic brain damage may be compounded by secondary pathophysiological insults that can occur soon after trauma, during transfer to hospital or subsequent treatment of the head-injured patient. The aim of this prospective study was to quantify the burden of a wide range of secondary insults occurring after head injury and to relate these to 12-month outcome. In 124 adult head-injured patients studied during intensive care using a computerized data collection system, < or = 14 clinically indicated physiological variables were measured minute-by-minute. Verified values falling outside threshold limits for > or = 5 min, as defined by the Edinburgh University Secondary Insult Grading scheme, were analysed by insult grade and duration. A greater incidence of secondary insults was detected than previous studies have indicated. Insults were found in 91% of patients and occurred in all severities of head trauma, at all ages, and at every level of Injury Severity Score (ISS). The cumulative durations were much greater than previously recorded although 85% of the total time was at the least severe grade. Short duration insults were common. In 71 patients, in whom 8 insults could be assessed (intracranial pressure, arterial hypo- and hypertension, cerebral perfusion pressure, hypoxemia, pyrexia, brady- and tachycardia), outcome at 12 months was analysed using logistic regression to determine the relative influence of age, admission Glasgow Coma Sumscore, ISS, pupil response on admission, and insult duration on both mortality and morbidity. The most significant predictors of mortality in this patient set were durations of hypotensive (p = .0064), pyrexic (p = .0137), and hypoxemic (p = .0244) insults. When good versus poor outcome was considered, hypotensive insults (p = .0118) and pupil response on admission (p = .0226) were significant.

Role of intracranial pressure monitoring in severely head-injured patients without signs of intracranial hypertension on initial computerized tomography.

Previous studies have suggested that only a small proportion (< 15%) of comatose head-injured patients whose initial computerized tomography (CT) scan was normal or did not show a mass lesion, midline shift, or abnormal basal cisterns develop intracranial hypertension. The aim of the present study was to re-examine this finding against a background of more intensive monitoring and data acquisition. Eight severely head-injured patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or less, whose admission CT scan did not show a mass lesion, midline shift, or effaced basal cisterns, underwent minute-to-minute recordings of arterial blood pressure, intracranial pressure (ICP), and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) derived from blood pressure minus ICP. Intracranial hypertension (ICP > or = 20 mm Hg lasting longer than 5 minutes) was recorded in seven of the eight patients; in five cases the rise was pronounced in terms of both magnitude (ICP > or = 30 mm Hg) and duration. Reduced CPP (< or = 60 mm Hg lasting longer than 5 minutes) was recorded in five patients. Severely head-injured (comatose) patients whose initial CT scan is normal or does not show a mass lesion, midline shift, or abnormal cisterns nevertheless remain at substantial risk of developing significant secondary cerebral insults due to elevated ICP and reduced CPP. The authors recommend continuous ICP and blood pressure monitoring with derivation of CPP in all comatose head-injured patients.

Glasgow Outcome Scale: an inter-rater reliability study.

This study was set up to test the reliability of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) when information was obtained from different sources. Eighty assessments were carried out on a group of 58 patients at three different time intervals up to 24 months post-injury. Each assessment consisted of three independently obtained GOS scores for each patient; (i) a score by a research psychologist after interview and neuropsychological testing of the patient; (ii) a score, obtained by post, by the patient's general practitioner (GP), and (iii) a score made by a research worker based on questionnaire information obtained from relatives by post. The agreement between the psychologist's score and that based on the relatives' information was high (r = 0.79 p = 0.001) whereas the correlation between the psychologist's score and that of the GP was low (r = 0.49 p = 0.001). The GPs tended to make overoptimistic assessments and this was most notable at 6 months post-injury when only 50% of the GPs' assessments agreed with those of the psychologist. We have shown that reliability of the GOS varies with the method of obtaining data. Ideally patients should be interviewed and tested by staff who have not been involved in the acute care of the patient. Failing this, information should be obtained from relatives of the patient and used by staff, trained in the use of the GOS, to assign a GOS score.