New Diagnostic Criteria for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Medical-Legal Considerations

IF 3.7 2区医学 Q1 REHABILITATION

Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation Pub Date : 2025-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.apmr.2025.06.015

Grant L. Iverson PhD , Kristen Dams-O'Connor PhD , William J. Panenka MD , Jaclyn A. Stephens PhD, OTR/L , Steven D. Lockman MD , Zainab Al Lawati MD, MEd , Anthony H. Lequerica PhD , Jacob I. McPherson DPT, PhD , Joshua Kamins MD , Noah D. Silverberg PhD

{"title":"New Diagnostic Criteria for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Medical-Legal Considerations","authors":"Grant L. Iverson PhD , Kristen Dams-O'Connor PhD , William J. Panenka MD , Jaclyn A. Stephens PhD, OTR/L , Steven D. Lockman MD , Zainab Al Lawati MD, MEd , Anthony H. Lequerica PhD , Jacob I. McPherson DPT, PhD , Joshua Kamins MD , Noah D. Silverberg PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.apmr.2025.06.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The new American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine diagnostic criteria for mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) were published in 2023. The criteria are designed to be used across clinical settings. This article discusses some medical-legal issues and implications relating to the use of the new ACRM diagnostic criteria. First, the new criteria differ from previously published definitions. Second, the criteria can be applied weeks, months, or years after an injury through a clinical interview and review of records. Third, when there is diagnostic uncertainty, and the “suspected” mTBI classification is used, this is not meant to convey a level of diagnostic certainty, from a medical-legal perspective. Fourth, the diagnostic process could be influenced by subjectivity or biases on the part of the person or the examiner. Finally, the new criteria are diagnostic, not prognostic. They are designed to determine whether a person sustained an mTBI, but they are not designed to determine if a person’s health problems months or years after an injury are related to that injury.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8313,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","volume":"106 10","pages":"Pages 1615-1619"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003999325007749","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The new American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine diagnostic criteria for mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) were published in 2023. The criteria are designed to be used across clinical settings. This article discusses some medical-legal issues and implications relating to the use of the new ACRM diagnostic criteria. First, the new criteria differ from previously published definitions. Second, the criteria can be applied weeks, months, or years after an injury through a clinical interview and review of records. Third, when there is diagnostic uncertainty, and the “suspected” mTBI classification is used, this is not meant to convey a level of diagnostic certainty, from a medical-legal perspective. Fourth, the diagnostic process could be influenced by subjectivity or biases on the part of the person or the examiner. Finally, the new criteria are diagnostic, not prognostic. They are designed to determine whether a person sustained an mTBI, but they are not designed to determine if a person’s health problems months or years after an injury are related to that injury.

查看原文本刊更多论文

轻度创伤性脑损伤的新诊断标准：医学-法律考虑。

新的美国康复医学大会（ACRM）轻度创伤性脑损伤（mTBI）诊断标准于2023年发布。这些标准的设计是为了在临床环境中使用。本文讨论了与使用新的ACRM诊断标准有关的一些医疗法律问题和影响。首先，新标准不同于以前公布的定义。其次，通过临床访谈和记录审查，这些标准可以在受伤后的几周、几个月或几年内应用。第三，当诊断不确定时，使用“疑似”mTBI分类，从医学-法律的角度来看，这并不意味着传达某种程度的诊断确定性。第四，诊断过程可能受到主观性或个人或审查员的偏见的影响。最后，新标准是诊断性的，而不是预后性的。它们的目的是确定一个人是否患有mTBI，但它们的目的不是确定一个人在受伤几个月或几年后的健康问题是否与那次受伤有关。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 医学-康复医学

CiteScore

6.20

自引率

4.70%

发文量

495

审稿时长

38 days

期刊介绍： The Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation publishes original, peer-reviewed research and clinical reports on important trends and developments in physical medicine and rehabilitation and related fields. This international journal brings researchers and clinicians authoritative information on the therapeutic utilization of physical, behavioral and pharmaceutical agents in providing comprehensive care for individuals with chronic illness and disabilities. Archives began publication in 1920, publishes monthly, and is the official journal of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Its papers are cited more often than any other rehabilitation journal.