In:
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science (PLoS), Vol. 18, No. 4 ( 2023-4-7), p. e0280796-
Abstract:
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) can negatively impact patients’ lives on many dimensions. Multiple instruments are available for evaluating TBI outcomes, but it is still unclear which instruments are the most sensitive for that purpose. This study examines the sensitivity of nine outcome instruments in terms of their ability to discriminate within and between specific patient groups, selected a priori as identified from the literature, at three different time points within a year after TBI (i.e., 3, 6, and 12 months post injury). The sensitivity of the instruments to sociodemographic (sex, age, education), premorbid (psychological health status), and injury-related (clinical care pathways, TBI and extracranial injury severity) factors was assessed by means of cross-sectional multivariate Wei-Lachin analyses. The Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE)–the standard in the field of TBI for measuring functional recovery–demonstrated the highest sensitivity in most group comparisons. However, as single functional scale, it may not be able to reflect the multidimensional nature of the outcome. Therefore, the GOSE was used as a reference for further sensitivity analyses on more specific outcome scales, addressing further potential deficits following TBI. The physical component summary score (PCS) of the generic health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments (SF-36v2/-12v2) and the TBI-specific HRQOL instruments (QOLIBRI/-OS) were most sensitive in distinguishing recovery after TBI across all time points and patient groups, followed by the RPQ assessing post-concussion symptoms and the PHQ-9 measuring depression. The SF-36v2/-12v2 mental component summary score and the GAD-7 measuring anxiety were less sensitive in several group comparisons. The assessment of the functional recovery status combined with generic HRQOL (the PCS of the SF-12v2), disease-specific HRQOL (QOLIBRI-OS), and post-concussion symptoms (RPQ) can provide a sensitive, comprehensive, yet time-efficient evaluation of the health status of individuals after TBI in different patient groups.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1932-6203
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.g001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.g002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.g003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.g004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.g005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.g006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.t001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s007
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s008
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s009
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s010
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s011
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.s012
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.r001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.r002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.r003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0280796.r004
Language:
English
Publisher:
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Publication Date:
2023
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2267670-3
Permalink