• Brandon Foreman, Gregory Kapinos, Mark S Wainwright, Laura B Ngwenya, Kristine H O'Phelan, Kerri L LaRovere, Matthew P Kirschen, Brian Appavu, Christos Lazaridis, Ayham Alkhachroum, Carolina B Maciel, Edilberto Amorim, Jason J Chang, Emily J Gilmore, Eric S Rosenthal, and Soojin Park.
• Department of Neurology & Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
• Crit. Care Med. 2023 Dec 1; 51 (12): 174017531740-1753.

ObjectivesTo address areas in which there is no consensus for the technologies, effort, and training necessary to integrate and interpret information from multimodality neuromonitoring (MNM).DesignA three-round Delphi consensus process.SettingElectronic surveys and virtual meeting.SubjectsParticipants with broad MNM expertise from adult and pediatric intensive care backgrounds.InterventionsNone.Measurements And Main ResultsTwo rounds of surveys were completed followed by a virtual meeting to resolve areas without consensus and a final survey to conclude the Delphi process. With 35 participants consensus was achieved on 49% statements concerning MNM. Neurologic impairment and the potential for MNM to guide management were important clinical considerations. Experts reached consensus for the use of MNM-both invasive and noninvasive-for patients in coma with traumatic brain injury, aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, and intracranial hemorrhage. There was consensus that effort to integrate and interpret MNM requires time independent of daily clinical duties, along with specific skills and expertise. Consensus was reached that training and educational platforms are necessary to develop this expertise and to provide clinical correlation.ConclusionsWe provide expert consensus in the clinical considerations, minimum necessary technologies, implementation, and training/education to provide practice standards for the use of MNM to individualize clinical care.Copyright © 2023 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

15 keywords...

hide…