Advertisement

Posttraumatic rehabilitation and one year outcome following acute traumatic brain injury (TBI): Data from the well defined population based German Prospective Study 2000–2002

  • K. R. H. von Wild
  • Münster TBI Study Council
Part of the Acta Neurochirurgica Supplementum book series (NEUROCHIRURGICA, volume 101)

Abstract

Follow-up examination to review the one-year outcome of patients after craniocerebral trauma with respect to health related quality of life (QoL) and social ré inté gration. The data are derived from the prospective controlled, well defined population based, multiple centre study that was performed in Germany for the first time in the years 2000–2001 with emphasis on quality management (structural, process, outcome) and regarding the patient’s age, physical troubles, and impaired mentalcognitive, neurobehavioral functioning. TBI severity assessment is according to the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score. Early outcome after rehabilitation is assessed by the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score of patients following rehabilitation and of 63% of all TBI with the aid of follow-up examination (simplified questionnaire) after one year. Catchment areas are Hanover (industrial) and Münster (more rural) with 2,114 million inhabitants. TBI is diagnosed according to ICD 10 S-02, S-04, S-06, S-07, S-09 with at least two of the following symptoms: dizziness or vomiting; retrograde or anterograde amnesia, impaired consciousness, skull fracture, and/or focal neurological impairment. Within one year 6.783 patients (58% male) were examined in the regional hospitals after acute TBI. The regional TBI incidence regarding hospital admission was 321/100.000 TBI. 28% of patients were <1 to 15 years, 18% >65 years of age. GCS was only assessed in 55% of patients. They were 90.9% mild, 3.9% moderate, and 5.2% severe TBI. A total of 5.221 TBI (=77%) was hospitalised; 1.4% of them died. Only 258 patients (= 4.9%) of the hospitalized TBI received in-hospital neurorehabilitation (73% male), 68% within one month after injury. They were 10.9% severe, 23.4% moderate, and 65.7 mild TBI. 5% were <16 years, 25% >65 years. One-year follow-up examinations of 4307 individuals (=63.5% of all TBI) are discussed. A total of 883 patients (=20.6%) reported posttraumatic troubles, one half were >64 years. One hundred and sixty patients (= 3.8%) could manage their daily life only partly; 75 TBI (= 87.2%) following mild, 5.8% moderate, and 7% severe TBI. One hundred and sixteen patients could not at all manage their activities in training, at school, or in their jobs (TV =33 MTBI respectively 54%), 6 (= 10%) moderate, and 22 (= 36%) severe TBI. 2.8% of individuals failed when compared with their pre-traumatic situation. TBI severity, patient’s age, concomitant organ lesions, and complications influence health related QoL and early social ré inté gration.

Keywords

Traumatic brain injury in Germany quality management of TBI; holistic posttraumatic neurorehabilitation posttraumatic functional mental-cognitive, neurobehavioral impairment social ré inté gration health related quality of life following TBI 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baethmann A, Wirth A, Chapuis D et al (2000) A system analysis of the pre-and early hospital care in severe head injury in Bavaria. Rest Neurol Neurosci 16(3/4): 1–4Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berger E, Leven F, Pirente N, Bouillon B, Neugebauer E (1999) Quality of life after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review of the literature. Rest Neurol Neurosci 14: 93–102Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ben-Yishay Y, Daniels-Zide E (2000) Examined lives: outcome after holistic rehabilitation. Rehabil Psychol 45(2): 112–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bouillon B et al (1999) The incidence and outcome of severe brain trauma — Design and first results of an epidemiological study in an urban area. Restorative Neurol Neurosci 14: 85–92Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Christensen AL (1988) Preface. In: Christensen AL, Uzzell B (eds) Neuropsychological rehabilitation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston/London, p XVGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dobkin BH (2004) Neurobiology of rehabilitation. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1038: 148–170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kraus JF, McArthur DL, Silverman TA, Jayaraman M (1996) Epidemiology of brain injury. In: Narayan RK, Wilberger JE Jr, Povlishock JT (eds) Neurotrauma. McGraw-Hill Companies Inc, New York, pp 13–30Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Neugebauer E, Lefering R, Noth J (1999) Neurotrauma and Plasticity (guest eds). Rest Neurol Neurosci 14(2, 3): 83–84Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ortega-Suhrkamp E, von Wild KRH (2002) Standards of neuro-logical-neurosurgical rehabilitation. Acta Neurochir Suppl 79: 11–19PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stein DG (2000) Brain injury and theories of recovery. In: Christensen AL, Uzzell BP (eds) International handbook of neuropsychological rehabilitation, pp 9–32Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Truelle J-L, von Steinbuechel N, von Wild KRH et al (2008) The QOLIBRI-towards a quality of life tool after traumatic brain injury: current developments in Asia. In: Chiu W-T, Kao M-C, Hung C-C et al (eds) Acta Neurochir Suppl 101: 125–129Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    von Wild KRH, et al (2005) Neurorehabilitation following cranio-cerebral trauma. European J Trauma 4: 344–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. R. H. von Wild
    • 1
  • Münster TBI Study Council
  1. 1.Westphälische Wilhelms-UniversityMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations