Neurocritical care
-
Patient monitoring is routinely performed in all patients who receive neurocritical care. The combined use of monitors, including the neurologic examination, laboratory analysis, imaging studies, and physiological parameters, is common in a platform called multi-modality monitoring (MMM). ⋯ The use of MMM now is being facilitated by the evolution of bio-informatics in critical care including developing techniques to acquire, store, retrieve, and display integrated data and new analytic techniques for optimal clinical decision making. In this review, we will discuss the crucial initial steps toward data and information management, which in this emerging era of data-intensive science is already shifting concepts of care for acute brain injury and has the potential to both reshape how we do research and enhance cost-effective clinical care.
-
Observational Study
Ethnic Disparities in End-of-Life Care After Subarachnoid Hemorrhage.
It is common for patients who die from subarachnoid hemorrhage to have a focus on comfort measures at the end of life. The potential role of ethnicity in end-of-life decisions after brain injury has not been extensively studied. ⋯ After subarachnoid hemorrhage, Blacks and Hispanics are less likely to die with CMO orders than Whites. Further research to confirm and investigate the causes of these ethnic differences should be performed.
-
Regional multimodality monitoring has evolved over the last several years as a tool to understand the mechanisms of brain injury and brain function at the cellular level. Multimodality monitoring offers an important augmentation to the clinical exam and is especially useful in comatose neurocritical care patients. ⋯ These tools may allow for development of individual therapeutic strategies that are mechanistically driven and goal-directed. We present a summary of the discussions that took place during the Second Neurocritical Care Research Conference regarding regional brain monitoring.
-
Neurocritical care involves the care of highly complex patients with combinations of physiologic derangements in the brain and in extracranial organs. The level of evidence underpinning treatment recommendations remains low due to a multitude of reasons including an incomplete understanding of the involved physiology; lack of good quality, prospective, standardized data; and the limited success of conventional randomized controlled trials. Comparative effectiveness research can provide alternative perspectives and methods to enhance knowledge and evidence within the field of neurocritical care; these include large international collaborations for generation and maintenance of high quality data, statistical methods that incorporate heterogeneity and individualize outcome prediction, and finally advanced bioinformatics that integrate large amounts of variable-source data into patient-specific phenotypes and trajectories.