Page 145 - DECISION-MAKING IN SEVERE TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY PATIENT OUTCOME, HOSPITAL COSTS, AND RESEARCH PRACTICE

Focus groups on clinical decision-making in severe traumatic brain injury
16. Volovici V, Ercole A, Citerio G, et al. Variation in guideline implementation and adherence regarding severe traumatic brain injury treatment: A CENTER-TBI survey study in Europe. World Neurosurg 2019.
17. van Essen TA, den Boogert HF, Cnossen MC, et al. Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury: A survey in 68 centers participating in the CENTER- TBI study. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2019; 161:435- 449
18. * Boyer F, Audibert G, Baumann C, et al. [decision-making regarding treatment limitation after severe traumatic brain injury: A survey of French neurosurgeons]. Neurochirurgie 2018; 64:401-409. Decision- making in traumatic brain injury is not well understood. Surveys as reported in this article help understand why physicians make decisions and could explain treatment variation or identify future research directives.
19. Czech H, Druml C, Weindling P. Medical ethics in the 70 years after the nuremberg code, 1947 to the present. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2018; 130: 159-253
20. Beauchamp TC, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2013.
21. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 2013; 310:2191-2194.
22. Parsa-Parsi RW. The revised Declaration of Geneva: A modern-day physician’s pledge. JAMA 2017; 318:1971- 1972
23. World Medical Association Declaration of Taipei on ethical considerations regarding health databases and biobanks. Published October 2016 [Available from: https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration- of-taipei-on-ethical-considerations- regarding-health-databases-and-biobanks/. Accessed: May 17, 2019.
24. * Turnbull AE, Chessare CM, Coffin RK, et al. More than one in three proxies do not know their loved one’s
current code status: An observational study in a Maryland ICU. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0211531. Decisions in 6 clinical practice are frequently discussed with proxies, especially in mentally incapacitated patients. This
article reports the accuracy of proxy decision-making.
25. Frey R, Herzog SM, Hertwig R. Deciding on behalf of others: A population survey on procedural preferences for surrogate decision-making. BMJ Open 2018; 8:e022289.
26. ** Grignoli N, Di Bernardo V, Malacrida R. New perspectives on substituted relational autonomy for shared decision-making in critical care. Crit Care 2018; 22:260. This viewpoint article describes the clinical environment of mentally incapacitated patients where treatment decisions have to be made. New perspectives on substituted relational autonomy are discussed in an attempt to improve shared decision- making in critical care.
27. Gopalakrishnan MS, Shanbhag NC, Shukla DP, et al. Complications of decompressive craniectomy. Front Neurol 2018; 9:977.
28. Forslund MV, Perrin PB, Roe C, et al. Global outcome trajectories up to 10 years after moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. Front Neurol 2019; 10:219
29. * Pratt AK, Chang JJ, Sederstrom NO. A fate worse than death: Prognosticationof devastating brain injury. Crit Care Med 2019; 47:591-598. The authors elaborate on the uncertainties on prognoticating devastating brain injury in the ICU. Supportive care is recommended for at least 72 hours to maximize the potential for recovery and minimize secondary injury.
30. van Dijck J, van Essen TA, Dijkman MD, et al. Functional and patient-reported outcome versus in-hospital costs after traumatic acute subdural hematoma (t-ASDH): A neurosurgical paradox? Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2019; 161:875-884.
31. * Andelic N, Howe EI, Hellstrom T, et al. Disability and quality of life 20 years after traumatic brain injury. Brain Behav 2018; 8:e01018. One of the longest follow-up studies in traumatic brain injury, concluding that functional limitations persist even decades after the injury.
32. * Waqas M, Malik N, Shamim MS, et al. Quality of life among patients undergoing decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury using Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended and Quality Of Life after Brain Injury scale. World Neurosurg 2018; 116:e783-e790. Quality of life outcome measures are important for understanding the true consequences of medical interventions. This article shows the consequences on quality of life of a contronversial surgical intervention like a decompressive craniectomy.
33. ** Lazaridis C. Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments in perceived devastating brain injury: The key role of uncertainty. Neurocrit Care 2019; 30:33-41. Highly interesting article about the importance of existing uncertainties on prognostication of perceived devastating brain injury. It discusses the possibility that many withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments are made prematurely and are made based on false assumptions.
34. * Unterhofer C, Hartmann S, Freyschlag CF, et al. Severe head injury in very old patients: To treat or not to treat? Results of an online questionnaire for neurosurgeons. Neurosurg Rev 2018; 41:183-187. The decisions- making processes in traumatic brain injury are not well understood. These questionnaires could be helpful in understanding the specific factors of influence in decision- making processes.
143