Causes and Consequences of Treatment Variation in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Multicenter Study

Maryse C. Cnossen, Suzanne Polinder, Teuntje M. Andriessen, Joukje Van Der Naalt, Iain Haitsma, Janneke Horn, Gaby Franschman, Pieter E. Vos, Ewout W. Steyerberg, Hester Lingsma

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Objectives: Although guidelines have been developed to standardize care in traumatic brain injury, between-center variation in treatment approach has been frequently reported. We examined variation in treatment for traumatic brain injury by assessing factors influencing treatment and the association between treatment and patient outcome. Design: Secondary analysis of prospectively collected data. Setting: Five level I trauma centers in the Netherlands (2008-2009). Patients: Five hundred three patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale, 3-13). Interventions: We examined variation in seven treatment parameters: direct transfer, involvement of mobile medical team, mechanical ventilation, intracranial pressure monitoring, vasopressors, acute neurosurgical intervention, and extracranial operation. Measurements and Main Results: Data were collected on patient characteristics, treatment, and 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the extent to which treatment was determined by patient characteristics. To examine whether there were between-center differences in treatment, we used unadjusted and adjusted random effect models with the seven treatment parameters as dependent variables. The influence of treatment approach in a center (defined as aggressive and nonaggressive based on the frequency intracranial pressure monitoring) on outcome was assessed using multivariable random effect proportional odds regression models in those patients with an indication for intracranial pressure monitoring. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test alternative definitions of aggressiveness. Treatment was modestly related to patient characteristics (Nagelkerke R2 range, 0.12-0.52) and varied widely among centers, even after case-mix correction. Outcome was more favorable in patients treated in aggressive centers than those treated in nonaggressive centers (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.05-3.15). Sensitivity analyses, however, illustrated that the aggressiveness-outcome association was dependent on the definition used. Conclusions: The considerable between-center variation in treatment for patients with brain injury can only partly be explained by differences in patient characteristics. An aggressive treatment approach may imply better outcome although further confirmation is required.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)660-669
Number of pages10
JournalCritical Care Medicine
Volume45
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2017

Cite this

Cnossen, M. C., Polinder, S., Andriessen, T. M., Van Der Naalt, J., Haitsma, I., Horn, J., ... Lingsma, H. (2017). Causes and Consequences of Treatment Variation in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Multicenter Study. Critical Care Medicine, 45(4), 660-669. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000002263
Cnossen, Maryse C. ; Polinder, Suzanne ; Andriessen, Teuntje M. ; Van Der Naalt, Joukje ; Haitsma, Iain ; Horn, Janneke ; Franschman, Gaby ; Vos, Pieter E. ; Steyerberg, Ewout W. ; Lingsma, Hester. / Causes and Consequences of Treatment Variation in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury : A Multicenter Study. In: Critical Care Medicine. 2017 ; Vol. 45, No. 4. pp. 660-669.
@article{63ce49708c3c411fb3b307cdf2b11320,
title = "Causes and Consequences of Treatment Variation in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Multicenter Study",
abstract = "Objectives: Although guidelines have been developed to standardize care in traumatic brain injury, between-center variation in treatment approach has been frequently reported. We examined variation in treatment for traumatic brain injury by assessing factors influencing treatment and the association between treatment and patient outcome. Design: Secondary analysis of prospectively collected data. Setting: Five level I trauma centers in the Netherlands (2008-2009). Patients: Five hundred three patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale, 3-13). Interventions: We examined variation in seven treatment parameters: direct transfer, involvement of mobile medical team, mechanical ventilation, intracranial pressure monitoring, vasopressors, acute neurosurgical intervention, and extracranial operation. Measurements and Main Results: Data were collected on patient characteristics, treatment, and 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the extent to which treatment was determined by patient characteristics. To examine whether there were between-center differences in treatment, we used unadjusted and adjusted random effect models with the seven treatment parameters as dependent variables. The influence of treatment approach in a center (defined as aggressive and nonaggressive based on the frequency intracranial pressure monitoring) on outcome was assessed using multivariable random effect proportional odds regression models in those patients with an indication for intracranial pressure monitoring. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test alternative definitions of aggressiveness. Treatment was modestly related to patient characteristics (Nagelkerke R2 range, 0.12-0.52) and varied widely among centers, even after case-mix correction. Outcome was more favorable in patients treated in aggressive centers than those treated in nonaggressive centers (OR, 1.73; 95{\%} CI, 1.05-3.15). Sensitivity analyses, however, illustrated that the aggressiveness-outcome association was dependent on the definition used. Conclusions: The considerable between-center variation in treatment for patients with brain injury can only partly be explained by differences in patient characteristics. An aggressive treatment approach may imply better outcome although further confirmation is required.",
keywords = "Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended, intracranial pressure monitoring, observational studies, traumatic brain injury, treatment variation",
author = "Cnossen, {Maryse C.} and Suzanne Polinder and Andriessen, {Teuntje M.} and {Van Der Naalt}, Joukje and Iain Haitsma and Janneke Horn and Gaby Franschman and Vos, {Pieter E.} and Steyerberg, {Ewout W.} and Hester Lingsma",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/CCM.0000000000002263",
language = "English",
volume = "45",
pages = "660--669",
journal = "Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "0090-3493",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

Cnossen, MC, Polinder, S, Andriessen, TM, Van Der Naalt, J, Haitsma, I, Horn, J, Franschman, G, Vos, PE, Steyerberg, EW & Lingsma, H 2017, 'Causes and Consequences of Treatment Variation in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Multicenter Study' Critical Care Medicine, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 660-669. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000002263

Causes and Consequences of Treatment Variation in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury : A Multicenter Study. / Cnossen, Maryse C.; Polinder, Suzanne; Andriessen, Teuntje M.; Van Der Naalt, Joukje; Haitsma, Iain; Horn, Janneke; Franschman, Gaby; Vos, Pieter E.; Steyerberg, Ewout W.; Lingsma, Hester.

In: Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 45, No. 4, 01.04.2017, p. 660-669.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Causes and Consequences of Treatment Variation in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

T2 - A Multicenter Study

AU - Cnossen, Maryse C.

AU - Polinder, Suzanne

AU - Andriessen, Teuntje M.

AU - Van Der Naalt, Joukje

AU - Haitsma, Iain

AU - Horn, Janneke

AU - Franschman, Gaby

AU - Vos, Pieter E.

AU - Steyerberg, Ewout W.

AU - Lingsma, Hester

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - Objectives: Although guidelines have been developed to standardize care in traumatic brain injury, between-center variation in treatment approach has been frequently reported. We examined variation in treatment for traumatic brain injury by assessing factors influencing treatment and the association between treatment and patient outcome. Design: Secondary analysis of prospectively collected data. Setting: Five level I trauma centers in the Netherlands (2008-2009). Patients: Five hundred three patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale, 3-13). Interventions: We examined variation in seven treatment parameters: direct transfer, involvement of mobile medical team, mechanical ventilation, intracranial pressure monitoring, vasopressors, acute neurosurgical intervention, and extracranial operation. Measurements and Main Results: Data were collected on patient characteristics, treatment, and 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the extent to which treatment was determined by patient characteristics. To examine whether there were between-center differences in treatment, we used unadjusted and adjusted random effect models with the seven treatment parameters as dependent variables. The influence of treatment approach in a center (defined as aggressive and nonaggressive based on the frequency intracranial pressure monitoring) on outcome was assessed using multivariable random effect proportional odds regression models in those patients with an indication for intracranial pressure monitoring. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test alternative definitions of aggressiveness. Treatment was modestly related to patient characteristics (Nagelkerke R2 range, 0.12-0.52) and varied widely among centers, even after case-mix correction. Outcome was more favorable in patients treated in aggressive centers than those treated in nonaggressive centers (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.05-3.15). Sensitivity analyses, however, illustrated that the aggressiveness-outcome association was dependent on the definition used. Conclusions: The considerable between-center variation in treatment for patients with brain injury can only partly be explained by differences in patient characteristics. An aggressive treatment approach may imply better outcome although further confirmation is required.

AB - Objectives: Although guidelines have been developed to standardize care in traumatic brain injury, between-center variation in treatment approach has been frequently reported. We examined variation in treatment for traumatic brain injury by assessing factors influencing treatment and the association between treatment and patient outcome. Design: Secondary analysis of prospectively collected data. Setting: Five level I trauma centers in the Netherlands (2008-2009). Patients: Five hundred three patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale, 3-13). Interventions: We examined variation in seven treatment parameters: direct transfer, involvement of mobile medical team, mechanical ventilation, intracranial pressure monitoring, vasopressors, acute neurosurgical intervention, and extracranial operation. Measurements and Main Results: Data were collected on patient characteristics, treatment, and 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the extent to which treatment was determined by patient characteristics. To examine whether there were between-center differences in treatment, we used unadjusted and adjusted random effect models with the seven treatment parameters as dependent variables. The influence of treatment approach in a center (defined as aggressive and nonaggressive based on the frequency intracranial pressure monitoring) on outcome was assessed using multivariable random effect proportional odds regression models in those patients with an indication for intracranial pressure monitoring. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test alternative definitions of aggressiveness. Treatment was modestly related to patient characteristics (Nagelkerke R2 range, 0.12-0.52) and varied widely among centers, even after case-mix correction. Outcome was more favorable in patients treated in aggressive centers than those treated in nonaggressive centers (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.05-3.15). Sensitivity analyses, however, illustrated that the aggressiveness-outcome association was dependent on the definition used. Conclusions: The considerable between-center variation in treatment for patients with brain injury can only partly be explained by differences in patient characteristics. An aggressive treatment approach may imply better outcome although further confirmation is required.

KW - Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended

KW - intracranial pressure monitoring

KW - observational studies

KW - traumatic brain injury

KW - treatment variation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011842399&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002263

DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002263

M3 - Article

VL - 45

SP - 660

EP - 669

JO - Critical Care Medicine

JF - Critical Care Medicine

SN - 0090-3493

IS - 4

ER -