Trauma/original research
Neurocognitive Function of Emergency Department Patients With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.10.015Get rights and content

Study objective

We characterize the neurocognitive function of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with mild traumatic brain injury.

Methods

This prospective study took place at an urban, academic ED and Level I trauma center. Case patients consisted of a convenience sample of ED patients aged 18 to 59 years, presenting to the ED with mild traumatic brain injury and having a head computed tomography scan without traumatic abnormalities. Controls consisted of patients aged 18 to 59 years, presenting to the ED with an isolated, nondominant hand extremity injury. We excluded patients with multiple injuries and recent alcohol consumption. Subjects completed a computerized neurocognitive test battery (Immediate Post-concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing). The primary measures were verbal memory, visual memory, and visual motor and reaction speed. We compared raw and age-normalized neurocognitive performance between case patients and controls by using nonparametric statistics.

Results

We included a total of 23 head-injured case patients and 31 non–head-injured controls. Case patients and controls exhibited similar raw (median 80.1 versus 85.0 points; difference in medians –4.9; P=.26) and age-normalized (31.9 versus 57.4 percentile; difference in medians –25.5; P=.12) verbal memory. Case patients and controls exhibited similar raw (64.6 versus 63.5; difference 1.1; P=.79) and age-normalized (20.8 versus 25.8 percentile; difference –5.0; P=.44) visual memory. Compared with controls, mild traumatic brain injury case patients demonstrated slower raw (31.6 versus 37.0 points; difference –5.4; P=.002) and age-normalized (17.1 versus 57.6 percentile; difference –40.5; P=.001) visual motor speed. Mild traumatic brain injury case patients exhibited slower raw (median 0.66 versus 0.60 seconds; difference 0.06; P=.01) and age-normalized (29.3 versus 42.8 percentile; difference –13.5; P=.009) reaction times.

Conclusion

In conclusion, compared with the non–head-injured patients, ED mild traumatic brain injury patients demonstrated subtle but discernible neurocognitive deficits.

Introduction

Approximately 153,000 patients present annually to US emergency departments (EDs) with an isolated mild traumatic brain injury.1 Even without computed tomographic (CT) evidence of intracranial abnormalities, many of these patients may exhibit subtle but significant neurocognitive symptoms and deficits; for example, headaches, anxiety, fatigue, irritability, dizziness, and impaired memory or concentration.2 For select patients, these sequelae may prove debilitating, impairing individuals' abilities to attend school, work, or perform other activities of daily living.3 Nearly 38% of ED mild traumatic brain injury patients receive no specific directions for outpatient concussion follow-up.1 Ponsford et al4 found that individuals who did not receive prompt reevaluation and education reported increased number and severity of symptoms at 3 months postinjury.

An important mild traumatic brain injury management challenge is the early recognition of neurocognitive deficits. According to signs and symptoms alone, clinicians and patients may underestimate the range, significance, and severity of post–mild traumatic brain injury symptoms. Specialized neurocognitive assessments may facilitate early deficit identification in these patients, potentially aiding clinical management.5, 6 Extensive data describe the utility of baseline neurocognitive testing of athletes.7 Using these preinjury values, these studies have described neurocognitive deficits after sports-related mild traumatic brain injury and linked these initial impairments to short- and long-term outcomes.8, 9, 10

Only limited data characterize neurocognitive impairments in general ED mild traumatic brain injury patients.6, 11, 12 Compared with previous evaluations of sports concussion cohorts, these patients potentially differ in their age, mechanisms of injury, and comorbidities, among other factors. These individuals also do not typically participate in baseline concussion testing programs. The early recognition of neurocognitive impairment after mild traumatic brain injury could lead to improved treatment, and long-term outcomes.

The objective of this study was to characterize neurocognitive deficits in patients presenting to the ED after mild traumatic brain injury. We hypothesized that head-injured case patients would exhibit greater neurocognitive deficits than non–head-injured controls.

Section snippets

Study Design

This study was approved by the University of Pittsburgh institutional review board.

In this prospective study, we compared the neurocognitive function of mild traumatic brain injury case patients (aged 18 to 59 years, presenting to the ED with an isolated head injury, a Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score of 13 to 15, and a head CT scan without evidence of intracranial injury) with non–head-injured controls (aged 18 to 59 years, presenting to ED with an isolated nondominant extremity injury).

Setting

This

Results

We enrolled a total of 63 subjects, including 25 mild traumatic brain injury case patients and 38 controls (Figure 1). We excluded 1 case patient with a high impulse control composite score and 1 case patient who did not complete the protocol. We excluded 5 controls with high impulse control composite scores and 2 controls who did not complete the protocol. The final analysis included 23 case patients and 31 controls.

Between case patients and controls, there were no statistically significant

Limitations

We did not evaluate long-term neurocognitive outcomes of the study subjects. Although offered to all, only 2 subjects in this study opted to return for follow-up mild traumatic brain injury care or repeated neurocognitive testing. This observation may signal that subjects did not feel impaired enough to seek follow-up care or that there were other barriers to obtaining this type of specialty care.

Although we selected a reasonable control population for comparison with the head-injured case

Discussion

In this study we identified neurocognitive deficits in patients presenting to the ED after mild traumatic brain injury. Our effort illustrates the potential utility and limitations of ED-based neurocognitive testing in advancing initial mild traumatic brain injury recognition and evaluation. Patients with mild traumatic brain injury may demonstrate neurocognitive deficits despite having no visible intracranial abnormalities on head CT scan; for example, difficulty with concentrating, memory, or

References (29)

  • J.S. Delaney et al.

    Recognition and characteristics of concussions in the emergency department population

    J Emerg Med

    (2005)
  • P. Schatz et al.

    Sensitivity and specificity of the ImPACT Test Battery for concussion in athletes

    Arch Clin Neuropsychol

    (2006)
  • J.J. Bazarian et al.

    Emergency department management of mild traumatic brain injury in the USA

    Emerg Med J

    (2005)
  • K.M. Johnston et al.

    New frontiers in diagnostic imaging in concussive head injury

    Clin J Sport Med

    (2001)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Facts about concussion and brain injury and where to get help. Available...
  • J. Ponsford et al.

    Impact of early intervention on outcome following mild head injury in adults

    J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry

    (2002)
  • K.M. Johnston et al.

    Evidence-based review of sport-related concussion: clinical science

    Clin J Sport Med

    (2001)
  • J. Sheedy et al.

    Emergency department assessment of mild traumatic brain injury and prediction of post-concussion symptoms at one month post injury

    J Clin Exp Neuropsychol

    (2006)
  • M.W. Collins et al.

    Current issues in managing sports-related concussion

    JAMA

    (1999)
  • R.S. Moser et al.

    Prolonged effects of concussion in high school athletes

    Neurosurgery

    (2005)
  • M.R. Lovell et al.

    Recovery from mild concussion in high school athletes

    J Neurosurg

    (2003)
  • M.W. Collins et al.

    Cumulative effects of concussion in high school athletes

    Neurosurgery

    (2002)
  • A. Fabbri et al.

    Early predictors of unfavourable outcome in subjects with moderate head injury in the emergency department

    J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry

    (2008)
  • J.G. Cushman et al.

    Practice management guidelines for the management of mild traumatic brain injury: the EAST Practice Management Guidelines Work Group

    J Trauma

    (2001)
  • Cited by (35)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Provide feedback on this article at the journal's Web site, www.annemergmed.com.

    Supervising editor: Robert Silbergleit, MD

    Author contributions: MWC and HEW conceived and designed the study. SEP, MJS, and HEW obtained funding. SEP and MJS carried out data collection. SEP, MJS, and HEW analyzed the data. All authors contributed to drafting and editing the article. HEW takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.

    Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article, that might create any potential conflict of interest. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement. Grant support for this study was provided by the Pittsburgh Emergency Medicine Foundation and the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine Dean's Summer Research Program. Dr. Wang is supported by Clinical Scientist Development Award K08-HS013628 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Dr. Collins is co-developer and co-owner of IMPACT Applications, the company that distributes the IMPACT Concussion Management Software used in this study.

    Dr. Wang is now affiliated with the Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.

    Publication date: Available online January 24, 2009.

    Reprints not available from the authors.

    View full text