Review article
Systematic Review of Self-Reported Prognosis in Adults After Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Results of the International Collaboration on Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Prognosis

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2013.08.299Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective

To update the mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) prognosis review published by the World Health Organization Task Force in 2004.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus were searched from 2001 to 2012. We included published, peer-reviewed studies with more than 30 adult cases.

Study Selection

Controlled trials and cohort and case-control studies were selected according to predefined criteria. Studies had to assess subjective, self-reported outcomes. After 77,914 titles and abstracts were screened, 299 articles were eligible and reviewed for scientific quality. This includes 3 original International Collaboration on MTBI Prognosis (ICoMP) research studies.

Data Extraction

Eligible studies were critically appraised using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Two reviewers independently reviewed each study and tabled data from accepted articles. A third reviewer was consulted for disagreements.

Data Synthesis

Evidence from accepted studies was synthesized qualitatively into key findings, and prognostic information was prioritized according to design as exploratory or confirmatory. Of 299 reviewed studies, 101 (34%) were accepted and form our evidence base of prognostic studies. Of these, 23 addressed self-reported outcomes in adults, including 2 of the 3 original ICoMP research studies. These studies show that common postconcussion symptoms are not specific to MTBI/concussion and occur after other injuries as well. Poor recovery after MTBI is associated with poorer premorbid mental and physical health status and with more injury-related stress. Most recover over 1 year, but persistent symptoms are more likely in those with more acute symptoms and more emotional stress.

Conclusions

Common subjective symptoms after MTBI are not necessarily caused by brain injury per se, but they can be persistent in some patients. Those with more initial complaints and psychological distress recover slower. We need more high-quality research on these issues.

Section snippets

Methods

The literature search and critical review strategy are outlined in detail elsewhere. Briefly, the electronic databases MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus were systematically searched from January 1, 2001, to June 30, 2011.6 These searches were updated on February 10, 2012. The reference lists of all reviews and meta-analyses related to MTBI, and articles meeting the eligibility criteria were screened for additional studies. ICoMP members also provided studies they had knowledge

Results

After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria to 77,914 titles and abstracts, 2170 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. There were 173 eligible articles that assessed MTBI prognosis in adults, excluding studies of sport and military injuries, which are reported elsewhere.11, 12 Of the 173 articles on prognosis, 51 (29%) were evaluated as having a low risk of bias, and 21 of these included subjective, self-reported outcomes. The other studies reported on objective outcomes and

Discussion

Our results support the previous finding of the WHO Collaborating Centre Task Force on MTBI that self-reported symptoms such as headache, fatigue, self-perceived cognitive deficits and other so-called postconcussion symptoms are common in the acute stage of injury but are not specific to MTBI.4 When compared with uninjured controls, patients with MTBI do report more postconcussion symptoms at 3 months21, 22 and at 1 year.36, 37 However, postconcussion symptoms are equally prevalent in those

Conclusions

Since the prognosis review of the WHO Collaborating Centre Task Force, there has been some progress in understanding MTBI prognosis. Our results add to the growing evidence that postconcussion symptoms are not specific to MTBI and occur commonly in the general population and after other nonhead injuries. Our results also confirm the importance of psychosocial determinants of recovery. We conclude that self-reported symptoms can be persistent after MTBI, and there is a need for more intervention

Acknowledgments

We thank the other members of ICoMP—Jean-Luc af Giejerstam, MD, PhD; Eleanor Boyle, PhD; Victor G. Coronado, MD, MPH; Alison K. Godbolt, MBChB, MD; Ryan Hung, MD, MSc; Michelle Keightley, PhD; Alvin Li, BHSc; Connie Marras, MD, PhD; Peter Rumney, MD; and Britt-Marie Stålnacke, MD, PhD—for their contribution to this work; Panos Lambiris, MSc, Information Scientist, University Health Network, for assisting in developing, testing, and updating the search strategies; and Meijia Zhou, BSc, for

References (44)

  • S.A. McLean et al.

    Health status, not head injury, predicts concussion symptoms after minor injury

    Am J Emerg Med

    (2009)
  • R. Ferrari et al.

    Symptom expectation after minor head injury. A comparative study between Canada and Lithuania

    Clin Neurol Neurosurg

    (2001)
  • D.P. De Almeida Lima et al.

    Quality of life and neuropsychological changes in mild head trauma. Late analysis and correlation with S100B protein and cranial CT scan performed at hospital admission

    Injury

    (2008)
  • L.M. McCracken et al.

    Predicting complaints of impaired cognitive functioning in patients with chronic pain

    J Pain Symptom Manage

    (2001)
  • J. Styrke et al.

    Traumatic brain injuries in a well-defined population: epidemiological aspects and severity

    J Neurotrauma

    (2007)
  • J.D. Cassidy et al.

    Incidence, risk factors and prevention of mild traumatic brain injury: results of the WHO Collaborating Centre Task Force on Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

    J Rehabil Med

    (2004)
  • L.J. Carroll et al.

    Prognosis for mild traumatic brain injury: results of the WHO Collaborating Centre Task Force on Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

    J Rehabil Med

    (2004)
  • C. Cancelliere et al.

    Protocol for a systematic review of prognosis after mild traumatic brain injury: an update of the WHO Collaborating Centre Task Force findings

    Syst Rev

    (2012)
  • L.J. Carroll et al.

    Methodological issues and research recommendations for mild traumatic brain injury: the WHO Collaborating Centre Task Force on Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

    J Rehabil Med

    (2004)
  • Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Available at: http://www.sign.ac.uk/. Accessed February 1,...
  • P. Côté et al.

    A systematic review of the prognosis of acute whiplash and a new conceptual framework to synthesize the literature

    Spine

    (2001)
  • D. Moher et al.

    Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

    PLoS Med

    (2009)
  • Cited by (0)

    Supported by the Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation (grant no. 2010-ABI-MTBIWHO-871). The funder was not involved in the design or preparation of the study protocol, or in the management of the project, analysis or interpretation of data, or the preparation of the final article.

    No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has conferred or will confer a benefit on the authors or on any organization with which the authors are associated.

    The findings and conclusions in this research are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily represent the official views or policies of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or any agency of the United States government. Inclusion of individuals, programs, or organizations in this article does not constitute endorsement by the United States government.

    View full text