检测作战部署后的轻度脑外伤:退伍军人健康管理局临床系统与 LIMBIC-CENC 研究协议之间的协议。

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
William C Walker, Terri K Pogoda, Kaleb G Eppich, Clara E Dismuke-Greer, Samuel R Walton, Chelsea McCarty Allen, Sarah L Martindale, Nicholas D Davenport, Jared A Rowland, Shannon R Miles, Mary Jo Pugh, David X Cifu
{"title":"检测作战部署后的轻度脑外伤:退伍军人健康管理局临床系统与 LIMBIC-CENC 研究协议之间的协议。","authors":"William C Walker, Terri K Pogoda, Kaleb G Eppich, Clara E Dismuke-Greer, Samuel R Walton, Chelsea McCarty Allen, Sarah L Martindale, Nicholas D Davenport, Jared A Rowland, Shannon R Miles, Mary Jo Pugh, David X Cifu","doi":"10.1089/neu.2024.0316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Identifying historical mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) is important for many clinical care reasons; however, diagnosing mild TBI is inherently challenging and utility of screening is unknown. This study compares a standardized research process to an established clinical process for screening and diagnosis of historical mild TBI during combat deployment in a military/Veteran cohort. Using validated instruments, the Long-term Impact of Military-relevant Brain Injury Consortium-Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium (LIMBIC-CENC) prospective longitudinal study (PLS) screens for all potential concussive events (PCEs) and conducts structured concussion diagnostic interviews for each PCE. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) systematically screens all Veterans with a post-9/11 combat deployment for historical TBI and offers a comprehensive TBI evaluation (CTBIE) for those who screen positive. This study evaluates the agreement between these two systems on both PCE and mild TBI identification during combat deployment and identifies features of Veterans who were negative clinically but positive in research. VHA TBI screen and CTBIE data were obtained from Veterans Affairs Informatics and Computing Infrastructure and linked to the LIMBIC-CENC PLS dataset. VHA screen positive for PCE was defined as a positive response for the first two VHA TBI screen questions of that query mechanism and immediate signs/symptoms of TBI. The PLS identified more positive PCE screens during combat deployment (86% vs. 41%) than the VHA PCE screen, and overall agreement was poor (kappa = 0.113). Participants had higher odds of being VHA negative/PLS positive on the PCE screen if they were of older age, female sex, had more years of military service, more months in combat deployment, officer rank, or <50% service-connected disability rating and lower odds if they had less education attainment, higher combat intensity, or higher Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory scores. The LIMBIC-CENC PLS method also identified more Veterans with mild TBI during combat deployment compared with the VHA CTBIE (81% vs. 72%) with minimal overall agreement (kappa = 0.311). Participants had higher odds of being VHA negative/PLS positive for mild TBI diagnosis if they never married or were Air Force and had lower odds if they had higher combat intensity. The LIMBIC-CENC PLS research structured interview protocol identified higher rates of TBI than the VHA TBI assessment system both for positive PCE screens and positive mild TBI diagnosis during combat deployment. Agreement was far higher for TBI determinations compared with the PCE screening. Significant characteristics of PLS-positive/VHA-negative mismatches included demographic variables, military service variables, and current symptom levels. Further research is needed to better understand whether there is a clinical value to adjust the VHA TBI screening process and how these characteristics could be considered. Providers should be aware that some Veterans may have undocumented, positive mild TBI histories even if they underwent screening and/or CTBIE processes.</p>","PeriodicalId":16512,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurotrauma","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detecting Mild Traumatic Brain Injury after Combat Deployment: Agreement Between Veterans Health Administration Clinical System and LIMBIC-CENC Research Protocol.\",\"authors\":\"William C Walker, Terri K Pogoda, Kaleb G Eppich, Clara E Dismuke-Greer, Samuel R Walton, Chelsea McCarty Allen, Sarah L Martindale, Nicholas D Davenport, Jared A Rowland, Shannon R Miles, Mary Jo Pugh, David X Cifu\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/neu.2024.0316\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Identifying historical mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) is important for many clinical care reasons; however, diagnosing mild TBI is inherently challenging and utility of screening is unknown. This study compares a standardized research process to an established clinical process for screening and diagnosis of historical mild TBI during combat deployment in a military/Veteran cohort. Using validated instruments, the Long-term Impact of Military-relevant Brain Injury Consortium-Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium (LIMBIC-CENC) prospective longitudinal study (PLS) screens for all potential concussive events (PCEs) and conducts structured concussion diagnostic interviews for each PCE. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) systematically screens all Veterans with a post-9/11 combat deployment for historical TBI and offers a comprehensive TBI evaluation (CTBIE) for those who screen positive. This study evaluates the agreement between these two systems on both PCE and mild TBI identification during combat deployment and identifies features of Veterans who were negative clinically but positive in research. VHA TBI screen and CTBIE data were obtained from Veterans Affairs Informatics and Computing Infrastructure and linked to the LIMBIC-CENC PLS dataset. VHA screen positive for PCE was defined as a positive response for the first two VHA TBI screen questions of that query mechanism and immediate signs/symptoms of TBI. The PLS identified more positive PCE screens during combat deployment (86% vs. 41%) than the VHA PCE screen, and overall agreement was poor (kappa = 0.113). Participants had higher odds of being VHA negative/PLS positive on the PCE screen if they were of older age, female sex, had more years of military service, more months in combat deployment, officer rank, or <50% service-connected disability rating and lower odds if they had less education attainment, higher combat intensity, or higher Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory scores. The LIMBIC-CENC PLS method also identified more Veterans with mild TBI during combat deployment compared with the VHA CTBIE (81% vs. 72%) with minimal overall agreement (kappa = 0.311). Participants had higher odds of being VHA negative/PLS positive for mild TBI diagnosis if they never married or were Air Force and had lower odds if they had higher combat intensity. The LIMBIC-CENC PLS research structured interview protocol identified higher rates of TBI than the VHA TBI assessment system both for positive PCE screens and positive mild TBI diagnosis during combat deployment. Agreement was far higher for TBI determinations compared with the PCE screening. Significant characteristics of PLS-positive/VHA-negative mismatches included demographic variables, military service variables, and current symptom levels. Further research is needed to better understand whether there is a clinical value to adjust the VHA TBI screening process and how these characteristics could be considered. Providers should be aware that some Veterans may have undocumented, positive mild TBI histories even if they underwent screening and/or CTBIE processes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16512,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of neurotrauma\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of neurotrauma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2024.0316\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurotrauma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2024.0316","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

确定历史轻度创伤性脑损伤(TBI)是许多临床护理的重要原因;然而,诊断轻度创伤性脑损伤本身就具有挑战性,筛查的效用尚不清楚。本研究比较了一个标准化的研究过程和一个既定的临床过程,以筛选和诊断在一个军队/退伍军人队列战斗部署期间的历史轻度创伤性脑损伤。使用经过验证的仪器,美国退伍军人健康管理局(VHA)系统地筛查了9/11后战斗部署的所有退伍军人的历史TBI,并为筛查结果呈阳性的退伍军人提供了全面的TBI评估(CTBIE)。本研究评估了这两种系统在战斗部署期间PCE和轻度TBI识别上的一致性,并确定了临床阴性但研究阳性的退伍军人的特征。VHA TBI筛选和CTBIE数据来自退伍军人事务信息学和计算基础设施,并与LIMBIC-CENC PLS数据集相关联。PCE的VHA筛查阳性定义为对该查询机制的前两个VHA TBI筛查问题和TBI的即时体征/症状的阳性反应。在战斗部署期间,PLS识别出比VHA PCE屏幕更多的正面PCE屏幕(86%对41%),总体一致性较差(kappa = 0.113)。如果参与者年龄较大,性别为女性,服役年限较长,战斗部署时间较长,军官级别较高,或在PCE屏幕上VHA阴性/PLS阳性的几率较高
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Detecting Mild Traumatic Brain Injury after Combat Deployment: Agreement Between Veterans Health Administration Clinical System and LIMBIC-CENC Research Protocol.

Identifying historical mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) is important for many clinical care reasons; however, diagnosing mild TBI is inherently challenging and utility of screening is unknown. This study compares a standardized research process to an established clinical process for screening and diagnosis of historical mild TBI during combat deployment in a military/Veteran cohort. Using validated instruments, the Long-term Impact of Military-relevant Brain Injury Consortium-Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium (LIMBIC-CENC) prospective longitudinal study (PLS) screens for all potential concussive events (PCEs) and conducts structured concussion diagnostic interviews for each PCE. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) systematically screens all Veterans with a post-9/11 combat deployment for historical TBI and offers a comprehensive TBI evaluation (CTBIE) for those who screen positive. This study evaluates the agreement between these two systems on both PCE and mild TBI identification during combat deployment and identifies features of Veterans who were negative clinically but positive in research. VHA TBI screen and CTBIE data were obtained from Veterans Affairs Informatics and Computing Infrastructure and linked to the LIMBIC-CENC PLS dataset. VHA screen positive for PCE was defined as a positive response for the first two VHA TBI screen questions of that query mechanism and immediate signs/symptoms of TBI. The PLS identified more positive PCE screens during combat deployment (86% vs. 41%) than the VHA PCE screen, and overall agreement was poor (kappa = 0.113). Participants had higher odds of being VHA negative/PLS positive on the PCE screen if they were of older age, female sex, had more years of military service, more months in combat deployment, officer rank, or <50% service-connected disability rating and lower odds if they had less education attainment, higher combat intensity, or higher Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory scores. The LIMBIC-CENC PLS method also identified more Veterans with mild TBI during combat deployment compared with the VHA CTBIE (81% vs. 72%) with minimal overall agreement (kappa = 0.311). Participants had higher odds of being VHA negative/PLS positive for mild TBI diagnosis if they never married or were Air Force and had lower odds if they had higher combat intensity. The LIMBIC-CENC PLS research structured interview protocol identified higher rates of TBI than the VHA TBI assessment system both for positive PCE screens and positive mild TBI diagnosis during combat deployment. Agreement was far higher for TBI determinations compared with the PCE screening. Significant characteristics of PLS-positive/VHA-negative mismatches included demographic variables, military service variables, and current symptom levels. Further research is needed to better understand whether there is a clinical value to adjust the VHA TBI screening process and how these characteristics could be considered. Providers should be aware that some Veterans may have undocumented, positive mild TBI histories even if they underwent screening and/or CTBIE processes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of neurotrauma
Journal of neurotrauma 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
233
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Neurotrauma is the flagship, peer-reviewed publication for reporting on the latest advances in both the clinical and laboratory investigation of traumatic brain and spinal cord injury. The Journal focuses on the basic pathobiology of injury to the central nervous system, while considering preclinical and clinical trials targeted at improving both the early management and long-term care and recovery of traumatically injured patients. This is the essential journal publishing cutting-edge basic and translational research in traumatically injured human and animal studies, with emphasis on neurodegenerative disease research linked to CNS trauma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信