End-of-life practices in traumatic brain injury patients: Report of a questionnaire from the CENTER-TBI study

Machine Learning Reveals Demographic Disparities in Palliative Care Timing Among Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury Receiving Neurosurgical Consultation

BACKGROUND

Timely palliative care (PC) consultations offer demonstrable benefits for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), yet their implementation remains inconsistent. This study employs machine learning methods to identify distinct patient phenotypes and elucidate the primary drivers of PC consultation timing variability in TBI management, aiming to uncover disparities and inform more equitable care strategies.

METHODS

Data on admission, hospital course, and outcomes were collected for a cohort of 232 patients with TBI who received both PC consultations and neurosurgical consultations during the same hospitalization. Patient phenotypes were uncovered using principal component analysis and K-means clustering; time-to-PC consultation for each phenotype was subsequently compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis. An extreme gradient boosting model with Shapley Additive Explanations identified key factors influencing PC consultation timing.

RESULTS

Three distinct patient clusters emerged: cluster A (n = 86), comprising older adult White women (median 87 years) with mild TBI, received the earliest PC consultations (median 2.5 days); cluster B (n = 108), older adult White men (median 81 years) with mild TBI, experienced delayed PC consultations (median 5.0 days); and cluster C (n = 38), middle-aged (median: 46.5 years), severely injured, non-White patients, had the latest PC consultations (median 9.0 days). The clusters did not differ by discharge disposition (p = 0.4) or inpatient mortality (p > 0.9); however, Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significant difference in time-to-PC consultation (p < 0.001), despite no differences in time-to-mortality (p = 0.18). Shapley Additive Explanations analysis of the extreme gradient boosting model identified age, sex, and race as the most influential drivers of PC consultation timing.

CONCLUSIONS

This study unveils crucial disparities in PC consultation timing for patients with TBI, primarily driven by demographic factors rather than clinical presentation or injury characteristics. The identification of distinct patient phenotypes and quantification of factors influencing PC consultation timing provide a foundation for developing for standardized protocols and decision support tools to ensure timely and equitable palliative care access for patients with TBI.

Predictors of End-of-Life Care in Nonelderly Adults With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

INTRODUCTION

Older age is a well-established risk factor for withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WDLST) and discharge to hospice (DH) in traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, a paucity of data exists in identifying factors associated with end-of-life (EoL) care in younger patients with TBI. We sought to identify hospital and patient factors associated with EoL care and timing of EoL care in younger adults with severe TBI.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of the National Trauma Databank (2019). Adults (18-65 y) with severe TBI (Glasgow coma scale <9) were included in the analysis. Inclusion criteria included death, WDLST, or DH during the hospital stay. Exclusion criteria included Glasgow coma scale >8, death in the emergency department, and missing WDLST status. The primary outcome was EoL Care defined as those who either underwent WDLST or DH. The secondary outcome was early EoL care defined as EoL care within 72 h of admission.

RESULTS

A total of 1239 patients were included in the study, the median age was 43 y, and the majority were males (77%) and of white race (68%). A total of 667 (54%) patients underwent EoL Care. On multivariable analysis, increasing age (adjusted odd's ratio [aOR]: 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.03) and chronic alcoholism (aOR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.05-3.03) were independently associated with EoL. Conversely, patients of Black race (aOR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.22-0.49) and those admitted to university hospitals (odd's ratio 0.51 95% CI 0.33-0.74) and level II trauma centers (odd's ratio 0.57; 95% CI 0.37-0.88) were less likely to undergo EoL care. A total of 225 (34%) patients underwent early EoL Care. On multivariable analysis, presence of nonreactive pupils and absence of intracranial pressure monitor were independently associated with early EoL care.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant variation in EoL care exists in patients presenting with severe TBI. Better understanding of patient and hospital factors that influence these complex decisions may allow for targeted interventions to reduce variability in EoL practice in TBI across institutions.

Neuroimaging biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of patients with disorders of consciousness

The progress in neuroimaging and electrophysiological techniques has shown substantial promise in improving the clinical assessment of disorders of consciousness (DOC). Through the examination of both stimulus-induced and spontaneous brain activity, numerous comprehensive investigations have explored variations in brain activity patterns among patients with DOC, yielding valuable insights for clinical diagnosis and prognostic purposes. Nonetheless, reaching a consensus on precise neuroimaging biomarkers for patients with DOC remains a challenge. Therefore, in this review, we begin by summarizing the empirical evidence related to neuroimaging biomarkers for DOC using various paradigms, including active, passive, and resting-state approaches, by employing task-based fMRI, resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI), electroencephalography (EEG), and positron emission tomography (PET) techniques. Subsequently, we conducted a review of studies examining the neural correlates of consciousness in patients with DOC, with the findings holding potential value for the clinical application of DOC. Notably, previous research indicates that neuroimaging techniques have the potential to unveil covert awareness that conventional behavioral assessments might overlook. Furthermore, when integrated with various task paradigms or analytical approaches, this combination has the potential to significantly enhance the accuracy of both diagnosis and prognosis in DOC patients. Nonetheless, the stability of these neural biomarkers still needs additional validation, and future directions may entail integrating diagnostic and prognostic methods with big data and deep learning approaches.

Public and Clinician Perspectives on Ventilator Withdrawal in Vegetative State Following Severe Acute Brain Injury: A Vignette Survey

BACKGROUND

The vegetative state (VS) after severe acute brain injury (SABI) is associated with significant prognostic uncertainty and poor long-term functional outcomes. However, it is generally distinguished from imminent death and is exempt from the Life-Sustaining Treatment (LST) Decisions Act in Korea. Here, we aimed to examine the perspectives of the general population (GP) and clinicians regarding decisions on mechanical ventilator withdrawal in patients in a VS after SABI.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was undertaken, utilizing a self-reported online questionnaire based on a case vignette. Nationally selected by quota sampling, the GP comprised 500 individuals aged 20 to 69 years. There were 200 doctors from a tertiary university hospital in the clinician sample. Participants were asked what they thought about mechanical ventilator withdrawal in patients in VS 2 months and 3 years after SABI.

RESULTS

Two months after SABI in the case, 79% of the GP and 83.5% of clinicians had positive attitudes toward mechanical ventilator withdrawal. In the GP, attitudes were associated with spirituality, household income, religion, the number of household members. On the other hand, clinicians' attitudes were related to their experience of completing advance directives (AD) and making decisions about LST. In this case, 3 years after SABI, 92% of the GP and 94% of clinicians were more accepting of ventilator withdrawal compared to previous responses, based on the assumption that the patient had written AD. However, it appeared that the proportion of positive responses to ventilator withdrawal decreased when the patients had only verbal expressions (82% of the GP; 75.5% of clinicians) or had not previously expressed an opinion regarding LST (58% of the GP; 39.5% of clinicians).

CONCLUSION

More than three quarters of both the GP and clinicians had positive opinions regarding ventilator withdrawal in patients in a VS after SABI, which was reinforced with time and the presence of AD. Legislative adjustments are needed to ensure that previous wishes for those patients are more respected and reflected in treatment decisions.

Clinical outcomes and end-of-life treatment in 596 patients with isolated traumatic brain injury: a retrospective comparison of two Dutch level-I trauma centers

PURPOSE

With an increasingly older population and rise in incidence of traumatic brain injury (TBI), end-of-life decisions have become frequent. This study investigated the rate of withdrawal of life sustaining treatment (WLST) and compared treatment outcomes in patients with isolated TBI in two Dutch level-I trauma centers.

METHODS

From 2011 to 2016, a retrospective cohort study of patients aged ≥ 18 years with isolated moderate-to-severe TBI (Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) head ≥ 3) was conducted at the University Medical Center Rotterdam (UMC-R) and the University Medical Center Utrecht (UMC-U). Demographics, radiologic injury characteristics, clinical outcomes, and functional outcomes at 3-6 months post-discharge were collected.

RESULTS

The study population included 596 patients (UMC-R: n = 326; UMC-U: n = 270). There were no statistical differences in age, gender, mechanism of injury, and radiologic parameters between both institutes. UMC-R patients had a higher AIShead (UMC-R: 5 [4-5] vs. UMC-U: 4 [4-5], p < 0.001). There was no difference in the prehospital Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS). However, UMC-R patients had lower GCSs in the Emergency Department and used more prehospital sedation. Total in-hospital mortality was 29% (n = 170), of which 71% (n = 123) occurred after WLST. Two percent (n = 10) remained in unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) state during follow-up.

DISCUSSION

This study demonstrated a high WLST rate among deceased patients with isolated TBI. Demographics and outcomes were similar for both centers even though AIShead was significantly higher in UMC-R patients. Possibly, prehospital sedation might have influenced AIS coding. Few patients persisted in UWS. Further research is needed on WLST patients in a broader spectrum of ethics, culture, and complex medical profiles, as it is a growing practice in modern critical care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Traumatic Brain Injury as an Independent Predictor of Futility in the Early Resuscitation of Patients in Hemorrhagic Shock

This review explores the concept of futility timeouts and the use of traumatic brain injury (TBI) as an independent predictor of the futility of resuscitation efforts in severely bleeding trauma patients. The national blood supply shortage has been exacerbated by the lingering influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of blood donors available, as well as by the adoption of balanced hemostatic resuscitation protocols (such as the increasing use of 1:1:1 packed red blood cells, plasma, and platelets) with and without early whole blood resuscitation. This has underscored the urgent need for reliable predictors of futile resuscitation (FR). As a result, clinical, radiologic, and laboratory bedside markers have emerged which can accurately predict FR in patients with severe trauma-induced hemorrhage, such as the Suspension of Transfusion and Other Procedures (STOP) criteria. However, the STOP criteria do not include markers for TBI severity or transfusion cut points despite these patients requiring large quantities of blood components in the STOP criteria validation cohort. Yet, guidelines for neuroprognosticating patients with TBI can require up to 72 h, which makes them less useful in the minutes and hours following initial presentation. We examine the impact of TBI on bleeding trauma patients, with a focus on those with coagulopathies associated with TBI. This review categorizes TBI into isolated TBI (iTBI), hemorrhagic isolated TBI (hiTBI), and polytraumatic TBI (ptTBI). Through an analysis of bedside parameters (such as the proposed STOP criteria), coagulation assays, markers for TBI severity, and transfusion cut points as markers of futilty, we suggest amendments to current guidelines and the development of more precise algorithms that incorporate prognostic indicators of severe TBI as an independent parameter for the early prediction of FR so as to optimize blood product allocation.

Treatment-limiting decisions in patients with severe traumatic brain injury in the Netherlands

Introduction

Treatment-limiting decisions (TLDs) can be inevitable severe traumatic brain injury (s-TBI) patients, but data on their use remain scarce.

Research question

To investigate the prevalence, timing and considerations of TLDs in s-TBI patients.

Material and methods

s-TBI patients between 2008 and 2017 were analysed retrospecively. Patient data, timing, location, involvement of proxies, and reasons for TLDs were collected. Baseline characteristics and in-hospital outcomes were compared between s-TBI patients with and without TLDs.

Results

TLDs were reported in 117 of 270 s-TBI patients (43.3%) and 95.9% of deaths after s-TBI were preceded by a TLD. The majority of TLDs (68.4%) were categorized as withdrawal of therapy, of which withdrawal of organ-support in 64.1%. Neurosurgical intervention was withheld in 29.9%. The median time from admission to TLD was 2 days [IQR, 0-8] and 50.4% of TLDs were made within 3 days of admission. The main reason for a TLD was that the patients were perceived as unsalvageable (66.7%). Nearly all decisions were made multidisciplinary (99.1%) with proxies involvement (75.2%). The predicted mortality (CRASH-score) between patients with and without TLDs were 72.6 vs. 70.6%. The percentage of TLDs in s-TBI patients increased from 20.0% in 2008 to 42.9% in 2012 and 64.3% in 2017.

Discussion and conclusion

TLDs occurred in almost half of s-TBI patients and were instituted more frequently over time. Half of TLDs were made within 3 days of admission in spite of baseline prognosis between groups being similar. Future research should address whether prognostic nihilism contributes to self-fulfilling prophecies.

Palliative Care in Severe Neurotrauma Patients in the Intensive Care Unit

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide and many patients with TBI require intensive care unit (ICU) management. When facing a life-threatening illness, such as TBI, a palliative care approach that focuses on noncurative aspects of care should always be considered in the ICU. Research shows that neurosurgical patients in the ICU receive palliative care less frequently than the medical patients in the ICU, which is a missed opportunity for these patients. However, providing appropriate palliative care to neurotrauma patients in an ICU can be difficult, particularly for young adult patients. The patients' prognoses are often unclear, the likelihood of advance directives is small, and the bereaved families must act as decision-makers. This article highlights the different aspects of the palliative care approach as well as barriers and challenges that accompany the TBI patient population, with a particular focus on young adult patients with TBI and the role of their family members. The article concludes with recommendations for physicians for effective and adequate communication to successfully implement the palliative care approach into standard ICU care and to improve quality of care for patients with TBI and their families.

Ethical Considerations in Neuroprognostication Following Acute Brain Injury

Neuroprognostication following acute brain injury (ABI) is a complex process that involves integrating vast amounts of information to predict a patient's likely trajectory of neurologic recovery. In this setting, critically evaluating salient ethical questions is imperative, and the implications often inform high-stakes conversations about the continuation, limitation, or withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy. While neuroprognostication is central to these clinical "life-or-death" decisions, the ethical underpinnings of neuroprognostication itself have been underexplored for patients with ABI. In this article, we discuss the ethical challenges of individualized neuroprognostication including parsing and communicating its inherent uncertainty to surrogate decision-makers. We also explore the population-based ethical considerations that arise in the context of heterogenous prognostication practices. Finally, we examine the emergence of artificial intelligence-aided neuroprognostication, proposing an ethical framework relevant to both modern and longstanding prognostic tools.

Neuroprognostication: a conceptual framework

Neuroprognostication, or the prediction of recovery from disorders of consciousness caused by severe brain injury, is as critical as it is complex. With profound implications for mortality and quality of life, neuroprognostication draws upon an intricate set of biomedical, probabilistic, psychosocial and ethical factors. However, the clinical approach to neuroprognostication is often unsystematic, and consequently, variable among clinicians and prone to error. Here, we offer a stepwise conceptual framework for reasoning through neuroprognostic determinations - including an evaluation of neurological function, estimation of a recovery trajectory, definition of goals of care and consideration of patient values - culminating in a clinically actionable formula for weighing the risks and benefits of life-sustaining treatment. Although the complexity of neuroprognostication might never be fully reducible to arithmetic, this systematic approach provides structure and guidance to supplement clinical judgement and direct future investigation.

Long-term outcome after severe traumatic brain injury: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Expectation of long-term outcome is an important factor in treatment decision-making after severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI). Conclusive long-term outcome data substantiating these decisions is nowadays lacking. This systematic review aimed to provide an overview of the scientific literature on long-term outcome after sTBI.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using PubMed from 2008 to 2020. Studies were included when reporting long-term outcome ≥ 2 years after sTBI (GCS 3-8 or AIS head score ≥ 4), using standardized outcome measures. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the QUIPS tool.

RESULTS

Twenty observational studies were included. Studies showed substantial variation in study objectives and study methodology. GOS-E (n = 12) and GOS (n = 8) were the most frequently used outcome measures. Mortality was reported in 46% of patients (range 18-75%). Unfavourable outcome rates ranged from 29 to 100% and full recovery was seen in 21-27% of patients. Most surviving patients reported SF-36 scores lower than the general population.

CONCLUSION

Literature on long-term outcome after sTBI was limited and heterogeneous. Mortality and unfavourable outcome rates were high and persisting sequelae on multiple domains common. Nonetheless, a considerable proportion of survivors achieved favourable outcome. Future studies should incorporate standardized multidimensional and temporal long-term outcome measures to strengthen the evidence-base for acute and subacute decision-making.

HIGHLIGHTS

1. Expectation of long-term outcome is an important factor in treatment decision-making for patients with severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI). 2. Favourable outcome and full recovery after sTBI are possible, but mortality and unfavourable outcome rates are high. 3. sTBI survivors are likely to suffer from a wide range of long-term consequences, underscoring the need for long-term and multi-modality outcome assessment in future studies. 4. The quality of the scientific literature on long-term outcome after sTBI can and should be improved to advance treatment decision-making.

Occurrence and timing of withdrawal of life-sustaining measures in traumatic brain injury patients: a CENTER-TBI study

Background

In patients with severe brain injury, withdrawal of life-sustaining measures (WLSM) is common in intensive care units (ICU). WLSM constitutes a dilemma: instituting WLSM too early could result in death despite the possibility of an acceptable functional outcome, whereas delaying WLSM could unnecessarily burden patients, families, clinicians, and hospital resources. We aimed to describe the occurrence and timing of WLSM, and factors associated with timing of WLSM in European ICUs in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Methods

The CENTER-TBI Study is a prospective multi-center cohort study. For the current study, patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) admitted to the ICU and aged 16 or older were included. Occurrence and timing of WLSM were documented. For the analyses, we dichotomized timing of WLSM in early (< 72 h after injury) versus later (≥ 72 h after injury) based on recent guideline recommendations. We assessed factors associated with initiating WLSM early versus later, including geographic region, center, patient, injury, and treatment characteristics with univariable and multivariable (mixed effects) logistic regression.

Results

A total of 2022 patients aged 16 or older were admitted to the ICU. ICU mortality was 13% (n = 267). Of these, 229 (86%) patients died after WLSM, and were included in the analyses. The occurrence of WLSM varied between regions ranging from 0% in Eastern Europe to 96% in Northern Europe. In 51% of the patients, WLSM was early. Patients in the early WLSM group had a lower maximum therapy intensity level (TIL) score than patients in the later WLSM group (median of 5 versus 10) The strongest independent variables associated with early WLSM were one unreactive pupil (odds ratio (OR) 4.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3–12.4) or two unreactive pupils (OR 5.8, CI 2.6–13.1) compared to two reactive pupils, and an Injury Severity Score (ISS) if over 41 (OR per point above 41 = 1.1, CI 1.0–1.1). Timing of WLSM was not significantly associated with region or center.

Conclusion

WLSM occurs early in half of the patients, mostly in patients with severe TBI affecting brainstem reflexes who were severely injured. We found no regional or center influences in timing of WLSM. Whether WLSM is always appropriate or may contribute to a self-fulfilling prophecy requires further research and argues for reluctance to institute WLSM early in case of any doubt on prognosis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-021-06484-1.