Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Introduction

Traumatic brain injury management is a leading cause of disability and death in young adults. Our objective was to develop a new multidomain, comprehensive, sensitive, objective and easily reproducible outcome scale with high predictive accuracy to assess patients with traumatic brain injury. The developed outcome assessment tool, the Lagos Brain Disability Examination Scale was then tested for any association of outcome predictability with patients’ admission modified Marshall, Rotterdam and Helsinki computerized tomographic scores.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was carried out of patients aged 16 years and above who sustained traumatic brain injury. All recruited patients had their biodata and derived cranial computerized tomographic scores documented using the modified Marshall, Rotterdam and Helsinki computerized tomographic scale on a pro forma. Outcomes were assessed at eight weeks after traumatic brain injury with the Lagos Brain Disability Examination Scale. Statistical significance was judged at p < 0.05 level.

Results

Forty-one patients were included (31 males; mean age 38.6 years, median 38 years, range 16–83 years). The Helsinki score gave a better prognostic predictability compared to the other computerized tomographic scoring systems. Twenty-one (51.2%) patients had good recovery according to the Lagos Brain Disability Examination Scale grade.

Conclusions

Patients’ outcome prediction on the Lagos Brain Disability Examination Scale is best using the initial Helsinki computerized tomographic scoring system. The Lagos Brain Disability Examination Scale appears to be a comprehensive and valid outcome measure to use in patients with traumatic brain injury.

Keywords

Brain injury Helsinki score Lagos Brain Disability Examination Scale Modified Marshall score Rotterdam score

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Idowu

Akinbo

. Neurotrauma burden in a tropical urban conurbation level I trauma centre. Injury 2014; 45: 1717–1721.

Wong

Linn

Shinohara

, et al. Traumatic brain injury in Africa in 2050: a modeling study. Eur J Neurol 2015; 23: 382–386.

Idowu

Obafunwa

Soyemi

. Pituitary gland trauma in fatal nonsurgical closed traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj 2017; 31: 359–362.

Opara

Małecka

Szczygieł

. Clinimetric measurement in traumatic brain injuries. J Med Life 2014; 7: 124–127.

Ciesielska

Sokołowski

Kędziora-Kornatowska

, et al. Screening clinimetric scales used in the diagnostics of cognitive functions impairment in dementia. Systematic overview. J Health Sci 2013; 3: 393–410.

Wilmowska-Pietruszyńska

Bilski

. ICF as a tool for quantitative assessment of violation of proficiency in adjudication for the need of social protection. Orzecznictwo Lekarskie 2010; 7: 1–3.

Cardarelli

Virgilio

Taylor

. Evidence-based medicine. Part 2. An introduction to critical appraisal of articles on therapy. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2007; 107: 299–303.

Okyere-Dede

Nkalakata

Nkomo

, et al. Paediatric head injuries in the KwaZulu-Natal Province of South Africa: a developing country perspective. Trop Doct 2013; 43: 1–4.

Wilde

McCauley

Kelly

, et al. Feasibility of the Neurological Outcome Scale for Traumatic Brain Injury (NOS-TBI) in adults. J Neurotrauma 2010; 27: 975–981.

10.

Raj

Siironen

Skrifvars

, et al. Predicting outcome in traumatic brain injury: development of a novel computerized tomography classification system (Helsinki computerized tomography score). Neurosurgery 2014; 75: 632–646.

11.

Mata-Mbemba

Mugikura

Nakagawa

, et al. Early CT findings to predict early death in patients with traumatic brain injury: Marshall and Rotterdam CT scoring systems compared in the major academic tertiary care hospital in Northeastern Japan. Acid Radiol 2014; 21: 605–611.

12.

Havill

Sleigh

Davis

, et al. Observer error and prediction of outcome – grading of head injury based on computerised tomography. Crit Care Resusc 2001; 3: 15–18.

13.

Nasreddine

Phillips

Bedirian

, et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005; 53: 695–699.

14.

Bagiella

Novack

Ansel

, et al. Measuring outcome in traumatic brain treatment trials: recommendations from the traumatic brain injury clinical trials network. J Head Trauma Rehabilitat 2010; 25: 375–382.

15.

Dikmen

Corrigan

Levin

, et al. Cognitive outcome following traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabilitat 2009; 24: 430–438.

16.

Bedard

Taler

Steffener

. Long-term prospective memory impairment following mild traumatic brain injury with loss of consciousness: findings from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. Clin Neuropsychol 2018; 32: 1002–1018.

17.

Vissoci

JRN

de Oliveira

Gafaar

, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the MMSE and MoCA questionnaires in Tanzanian Swahili for a traumatic brain injury population. BMC Neurol 2019; 19: 57–67.

18.

Nelson

Nyström

MacCallum

, et al. Extended analysis of early computed tomography scans of traumatic brain injured patients and relations to outcome. J Neurotrauma 2010; 27: 51–64.

19.

Huang

Y-H

Deng

Y-H

Lee

T-C

, et al. Rotterdam computed tomography score as a prognosticator in head-injured patients undergoing decompressive craniectomy. Neurosurgery 2012; 71: 80–85.

20.

Maas

Hukkelhoven

Marshall

, et al. Prediction of outcome in traumatic brain injury with computed tomographic characteristics: a comparison between the computed tomographic classification and combinations of computed tomographic predictors. Neurosurgery 2005; 57: 1173–1182. discussion 1173–1182.

21.