Perceived Utility of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference Consensus-Based Analysis and Recommendations

BACKGROUND: Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is widely practiced, but the indications are incompletely developed, and guidelines are poorly followed. OBJECTIVE: To study the monitoring practices of an established expert panel (the clinical working group from the Seattle International Brain Inj...

Full description

Autores:
Chesnut, Randall M.
Aguilera, Sergio
Buki, Andras
Bulger, Eileen M.
Citerio, Giuseppe
Cooper, D Jamie
Arrastia Diaz, Ramon
Diringer, Michael
Figaji, Anthony
Gao, Guoyi
Geocadin, Romergryko G.
Ghajar, Jamshid
Harris, Odette
Hawryluk, Gregory W J
Hoffer, Alan
Hutchinson, Peter
Joseph, Mathew
Kitagawa, Ryan
Manley, Geoffrey
Mayer, Stephan
Menon, David K.
Meyfroidt, Geert
Michael, Daniel B.
Oddo, Mauro
Okonkwo, David O.
Patel, Mayur B.
Robertson, Claudia
Rosenfeld, Jeffrey V.
Rubiano, Andrés M.
Sahuquillo, Juain
Servadei, Franco
Shutter, Lori
Stein, Deborah M.
Stocchetti, Nino
Taccone, Fabio Silvio
Timmons, Shelly D.
Tsai, Eve C.
Ullman, Jamie S.
Videtta, Walter
Wright, David W.
Zammit, Christopher
Tipo de recurso:
Article of journal
Fecha de publicación:
2023
Institución:
Universidad El Bosque
Repositorio:
Repositorio U. El Bosque
Idioma:
eng
OAI Identifier:
oai:repositorio.unbosque.edu.co:20.500.12495/11253
Acceso en línea:
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12495/11253
https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000002516
Palabra clave:
Algoritmos
Desarrollo de consenso
Hipertensión intracraneal
Monitoreo de la presión intracraneal
Cuidados neurocríticos
Pautas de práctica
Lesión cerebral traumática
Algorithms
Consensus development
Intracranial hypertension
Intracranial pressure monitoring
Neurocritical care
Practice guidelines
Traumatic brain injury
Rights
openAccess
License
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
Description
Summary:BACKGROUND: Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is widely practiced, but the indications are incompletely developed, and guidelines are poorly followed. OBJECTIVE: To study the monitoring practices of an established expert panel (the clinical working group from the Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference effort) to examine the match between monitoring guidelines and their clinical decision-making and offer guidance for clinicians considering monitor insertion. METHODS: We polled the 42 Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference panel members' ICP monitoring decisions for virtual patients, using matrices of presenting signs (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] total or GCS motor, pupillary examination, and computed tomography diagnosis). Monitor insertion decisions were yes, no, or unsure (traffic light approach). We analyzed their responses for weighting of the presenting signs in decision-making using univariate regression. RESULTS: Heatmaps constructed from the choices of 41 panel members revealed wider ICP monitor use than predicted by guidelines. Clinical examination (GCS) was by far the most important characteristic and differed from guidelines in being nonlinear. The modified Marshall computed tomography classification was second and pupils third. We constructed a heatmap and listed the main clinical determinants representing 80% ICP monitor insertion consensus for our recommendations. CONCLUSION: Candidacy for ICP monitoring exceeds published indicators for monitor insertion, suggesting the clinical perception that the value of ICP data is greater than simply detecting and monitoring severe intracranial hypertension. Monitor insertion heatmaps are offered as potential guidance for ICP monitor insertion and to stimulate research into what actually drives monitor insertion in unconstrained, real-world conditions.