Skip to main content
Log in

Behavioral-play familiarization for non-sedated magnetic resonance imaging in young children with mild traumatic brain injury

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) sustained in early childhood affects the brain at a peak developmental period and may disrupt sensitive stages of skill acquisition, thereby compromising child functioning. However, due to the challenges of collecting non-sedated neuroimaging data in young children, the consequences of mTBI on young children’s brains have not been systematically studied. In typically developing preschool children (of age 3–5years), a brief behavioral-play familiarization provides an effective alternative to sedation for acquiring awake magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a time- and resource-efficient manner. To date, no study has applied such an approach for acquiring non-sedated MRI in preschool children with mTBI who may present with additional MRI acquisition challenges such as agitation or anxiety.

Objective

The present study aimed to compare the effectiveness of a brief behavioral-play familiarization for acquiring non-sedated MRI for research purposes between young children with and without mTBI, and to identify factors associated with successful MRI acquisition.

Materials and methods

Preschool children with mTBI (n=13) and typically developing children (n=24) underwent a 15-minutes behavioral-play MRI familiarization followed by a 35-minutes non-sedated MRI protocol. Success rate was compared between groups, MRI quality was assessed quantitatively, and factors predicting success were documented.

Results

Among the 37 participants, 15 typically developing children (63%) and 10 mTBI (77%) reached the MRI acquisition success criteria (i.e., completing the two first sequences). The success rate was not significantly different between groups (p=.48; 95% CI [-0.36 14.08]; Cramer’s V=.15). The images acquired were of high-quality in 100% (for both groups) of the structural images, and 60% (for both groups) of the diffusion images. Factors associated with success included older child age (Β=0.73, p=.007, exp(B)=3.11, 95% CI [1.36 7.08]) and fewer parental concerns (Β=-1.56, p=.02, exp(Β)=0.21, 95% CI [0.05 0.82]) about the MRI procedure.

Conclusion

Using brief behavioral-play familiarization allows acquisition of high-quality non-sedated MRI in young children with mTBI with success rates comparable to those of non-injured peers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Due to the nature of this research, participants of this study did not agree for their data to be shared publicly; therefore, supporting data are not available.

References

  1. Thurman DJ (2016) The epidemiology of traumatic brain injury in children and youths: A review of research since 1990. J Child Neurol 31:20–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Koepsell TD, Rivara FP, Vavilala MS et al (2011) Incidence and descriptive epidemiologic features of traumatic brain injury in King County, Washington. Pediatrics 128:946–954. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2010-2259

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Zemek RL, Farion KJ, Sampson M, McGahern C (2013) Prognosticators of persistent symptoms following pediatric concussion: a systematic review. JAMA Pediatr 167:259–265. https://doi.org/10.1001/2013.jamapediatrics.216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Séguin M, Gagner C, Türk C, et al (2023) What about the little ones? Systematic review of cognitive and behavioral outcomes following early TBI. Neuropsychol Rev 32(4):906–936. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-021-09517-0

  5. King DJ, Ellis KR, Seri S, Wood AG (2019) A systematic review of cross-sectional differences and longitudinal changes to the morphometry of the brain following paediatric traumatic brain injury. Neuroimage Clin 23:101844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101844

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Beauchamp MH, Ditchfield M, Babl FE et al (2011) Detecting traumatic brain lesions in children: CT versus MRI versus susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI). J Neurotrauma 28:915–927. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2010.1712

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Shenton ME, Hamoda HM, Schneiderman JS et al (2012) A review of magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion tensor imaging findings in mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Imaging Behav 6:137–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11682-012-9156-5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Lindberg DM, Stence N V., Grubenhoff JA, et al (2019) Feasibility and accuracy of fast MRI versus CT for traumatic brain injury in young children. Pediatrics 144:. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-0419

  9. Andropoulos DB (2018) Effect of anesthesia on the developing brain: infant and fetus. Fetal Diagn Ther 43:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1159/000475928

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lindsey HM, Wilde EA, Caeyenberghs K, Dennis EL (2019) Longitudinal neuroimaging in pediatric traumatic brain injury: Current state and consideration of factors that influence recovery. Front Neurol 10:1296. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2019.01296

  11. Dennis EL, Babikian T, Giza CC et al (2017) Diffusion MRI in pediatric brain injury. Child’s Nervous System 33:1683–1692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-017-3522-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Barkovich MJ, Xu D, Desikan RS et al (2018) Pediatric neuro MRI: tricks to minimize sedation. Pediatr Radiol 48:50–55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Copeland A, Silver E, Korja R et al (2021) Infant and child MRI: a review of scanning procedures. Front Neurosci 15:632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Thieba C, Frayne A, Walton M et al (2018) Factors associated with successful MRI scanning in unsedated young children. Front Pediatr 6:146. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2018.00146

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Vannest J, Rajagopal A, Cicchino ND et al (2014) Factors determining success of awake and asleep magnetic resonance imaging scans in nonsedated children. Neuropediatrics 45:370–377. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1387816

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. De Bie HMA, Boersma M, Wattjes MP et al (2010) Preparing children with a mock scanner training protocol results in high quality structural and functional MRI scans. Eur J Pediatr 169:1079–1085. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-010-1181-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Johnson K, Page A, Williams H et al (2002) The use of melatonin as an alternative to sedation in uncooperative children undergoing an MRI examination. Clin Radiol 57:502–506. https://doi.org/10.1053/crad.2001.0923

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Khan JJ, Donnelly LF, Koch BL, et al (2007) A program to decrease the need for pediatric sedation for CT and MRI. Appl Radiol (36)4:30–33

  19. Gagner C, Landry-Roy C, Bernier A, et al (2017) Behavioral consequences of mild traumatic brain injury in preschoolers. Psychol Med 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291717003221

  20. Li L, Liu J (2013) The effect of pediatric traumatic brain injury on behavioral outcomes: a systematic review. Dev Med Child Neurol 55:37. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1469-8749.2012.04414.X

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Dupont D, Beaudoin C, Désiré N et al (2021) Report of early childhood traumatic injury observations & symptoms: Preliminary validation of an observational measure of postconcussive symptoms. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation. https://doi.org/10.1097/HTR.0000000000000691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Beauchamp MH, Dégeilh F, Yeates K, et al (2020) PERC KOALA project. kids' outcomes and long-term abilities (KOALA): protocol for a prospective, longitudinal cohort study of mild traumatic brain injury in children 6 months to 6 years of age. BMJ Open 10(10):e040603. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040603 

  23. Long X, Kar P, Gibbard B et al (2019) The brain’s functional connectome in young children with prenatal alcohol exposure. Neuroimage Clin 24:102082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2019.102082

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Dean DC, O’Muircheartaigh J, Dirks H et al (2014) Modeling healthy male white matter and myelin development: 3 through 60 months of age. Neuroimage 84:742. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.NEUROIMAGE.2013.09.058

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Dai X, Hadjipantelis P, Wang JL et al (2019) Longitudinal associations between white matter maturation and cognitive development across early childhood. Hum Brain Mapp 40:4130. https://doi.org/10.1002/HBM.24690

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Levin HS, Diaz-Arrastia RR (2015) Diagnosis, prognosis, and clinical management of mild traumatic brain injury. Lancet Neurol 14:506–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00002-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Liu J, Kou Z, Tian Y (2014) Diffuse axonal injury after traumatic cerebral microbleeds: an evaluation of imaging techniques. Neural Regen Res 9:1222–1230. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.135330

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Studerus-Germann AM, Gautschi OP, Bontempi P et al (2018) Central nervous system microbleeds in the acute phase are associated with structural integrity by DTI one year after mild traumatic brain injury: a longitudinal study. Neurol Neurochir Pol 52:710–719. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PJNNS.2018.08.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Whitfield-Gabrieli S, Nieto-Castanon A (2012) Conn: a functional connectivity toolbox for correlated and anticorrelated brain networks. Brain Connect 2:125–141. https://doi.org/10.1089/brain.2012.0073

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Andersson JLR, Sotiropoulos SN (2016) An integrated approach to correction for off-resonance effects and subject movement in diffusion MR imaging. Neuroimage 125:1063–1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.10.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Andersson JLR, Graham MS, Zsoldos E, Sotiropoulos SN (2016) Incorporating outlier detection and replacement into a non-parametric framework for movement and distortion correction of diffusion MR images. Neuroimage 141:556–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.06.058

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Smith SM, Jenkinson M, Woolrich MW et al (2004) Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL. Neuroimage 23:S208–S219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.051

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Jenkinson M, Beckmann CF, Behrens TEJ et al (2012) FSL Neuroimage 62:782–790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.09.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Johnson CA, Garnett EO, Chow HM et al (2021) Developmental factors that predict head movement during resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging in 3–7-year-old stuttering and non-stuttering children. Front Neurosci 15:1488. https://doi.org/10.3389/FNINS.2021.753010/BIBTEX

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Almli CR, Rivkin MJ, McKinstry RC (2007) The NIH MRI study of normal brain development (Objective-2): Newborns, infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. Neuroimage 35:308–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.08.058

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Dupont D, Beaudoin C, Désiré N et al (2022) Report of early childhood traumatic injury observations & symptoms: preliminary validation of an observational measure of postconcussive symptoms. J Head Trauma Rehabil 37:E102–E112. https://doi.org/10.1097/HTR.0000000000000691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the Ste-Justine Hospital radiology team and MRI technologists, in particular Robert Trusilo, for their advice and support throughout the project. We also thank Hongfu Sun (University of Queensland) for her help processing the QSM data.

Funding

This project was funded by grants from the Ste-Justine Hospital Foundation (Défi Trauma) and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to MHB. CT received a doctoral scholarship (261327) from the Fonds de recherche du Québec—Nature et technologies (FRQNT). FD received a postdoctoral scholarship (35982) from the Fonds de recherche du Québec—Santé (FRQS). MD and TML received salary awards from the FRQS.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miriam H. Beauchamp.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 19 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dégeilh, F., Lacombe-Barrios, J., Tuerk, C. et al. Behavioral-play familiarization for non-sedated magnetic resonance imaging in young children with mild traumatic brain injury. Pediatr Radiol 53, 1153–1162 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-023-05592-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-023-05592-y

Keywords

Navigation