Increased Rates of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Among Older Adults in US Emergency Departments, 2009-2010

Psychotropic Medication Use among Medicare Beneficiaries Following Traumatic Brain Injury

OBJECTIVES

To characterize psychotropic medication use before and after traumatic brain injury (TBI) hospitalization among older adults. A secondary objective is to determine how receipt of indicated pharmacologic treatment for anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) differs following TBI.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years hospitalized with TBI between 2006 and 2010 with continuous drug coverage for 12 months before and after TBI (N = 60,276).

MEASUREMENTS

We obtained monthly psychotropic medication use by drug class and specific drugs from Medicare Part D drug event files.ICD-9 codes were used to define anxiety (300.0x) and PTSD (309.81).

RESULTS

Average monthly prevalence of psychotropic medication use among all patients hospitalized for TBI was 44.8%; antidepressants constituted 73%. Prevalence of psychotropic medication use increased from 2006 to 2010. Following TBI, psychotropic medication use increased slightly (OR: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.06.) Tricyclic antidepressant use decreased post-TBI (OR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.73, 0.79) whereas use of the sedating antidepressants mirtazapine (OR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.25, 1.37) and trazadone (OR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.17) increased. Antipsychotic (OR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.12, 1.19) use also increased post-TBI. Beneficiaries newly diagnosed with anxiety (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.36, 0.48) and/or PTSD (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.84) post-TBI were less likely to receive indicated pharmacologic treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults hospitalized with TBI have a high prevalence of psychotropic medication use yet are less likely to receive indicated pharmacological treatment for newly diagnosed anxiety and PTSD following TBI.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) in older adults: aging with a TBI versus incident TBI in the aged

Approximately 39 million older adults (age >65) were evaluated for traumatic brain injury (TBI) in United States emergency departments during the 2-year period from 2009 to 2010, representing a 61% increase in estimates from prior years (Albrecht et al., 2015a). Across the lifespan, an estimated 5.3 million Americans are living with a TBI-related disability (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2003). With improved recognition and management, more individuals experiencing TBI are surviving to die of other causes later in life (Flanagan et al., 2005). Taken together, these statistics highlight two important populations: those who are "aging with a TBI" and "incident TBI in the aged."

Does the cause of the mild traumatic brain injury affect the expectation of persistent postconcussion symptoms and psychological trauma?

INTRODUCTION

A controlled experiment of the effect of injury cause on expectations of outcome from mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) was conducted.

METHOD

Ninety-three participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions. The participants read a vignette that described a mild TBI (with fixed injury parameters) from a different cause (sport, domestic assault, fall, or motor vehicle accident). The effect of the manipulation on expectations of persistent postconcussion symptoms and psychological trauma was assessed with standard measures and a novel "threat-to-life" measure.

RESULTS

The Kruskal-Wallis H test for group differences revealed a significant but selective effect of group on symptom and trauma outcomes (ŋ²s ≥ .10; large effects). Post hoc pairwise tests showed that, in most cases, there was an expectation of a worse outcome following mild TBI from a domestic assault than from the other causes (small-to-medium effects).

CONCLUSION

Expectations were selectively altered by an experimental manipulation of injury cause. Given that expectations of outcome are known to affect mild TBI prognosis, the findings suggest the need for greater attention to injury cause.

Sex, Gender, and Traumatic Brain Injury: A Commentary

The goal of this supplemental issue is to address major knowledge, research, and clinical practice gaps regarding the limited focus on brain injury in girls and women as well as limited analysis of the effect of sex and gender in research on acquired brain injury. Integrating sex and gender in research is recognized as leading to better science and, ultimately, to better clinical practice. A sex and gender analytical approach to rehabilitation research is crucial to understanding traumatic brain injury and improving quality of life outcomes for survivors. Put another way, the lack of focus on sex and gender reduces the rigor of research design, the generalizability of study findings, and the effectiveness of clinical implementation and knowledge dissemination practices. The articles in this supplement examine sex and gender using a variety of methodological approaches and research contexts. Recommendations for future research on acquired brain injury that consciously incorporates sex and gender are made throughout this issue. This supplement is a product of the Girls and Women with ABI Task Force of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine.

Combination therapies for neurobehavioral and cognitive recovery after experimental traumatic brain injury: Is more better?

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a significant health care crisis that affects two million individuals in the United Sates alone and over ten million worldwide each year. While numerous monotherapies have been evaluated and shown to be beneficial at the bench, similar results have not translated to the clinic. One reason for the lack of successful translation may be due to the fact that TBI is a heterogeneous disease that affects multiple mechanisms, thus requiring a therapeutic approach that can act on complementary, rather than single, targets. Hence, the use of combination therapies (i.e., polytherapy) has emerged as a viable approach. Stringent criteria, such as verification of each individual treatment plus the combination, a focus on behavioral outcome, and post-injury vs. pre-injury treatments, were employed to determine which studies were appropriate for review. The selection process resulted in 37 papers that fit the specifications. The review, which is the first to comprehensively assess the effects of combination therapies on behavioral outcomes after TBI, encompasses five broad categories (inflammation, oxidative stress, neurotransmitter dysregulation, neurotrophins, and stem cells, with and without rehabilitative therapies). Overall, the findings suggest that combination therapies can be more beneficial than monotherapies as indicated by 46% of the studies exhibiting an additive or synergistic positive effect versus on 19% reporting a negative interaction. These encouraging findings serve as an impetus for continued combination studies after TBI and ultimately for the development of successful clinically relevant therapies.