ArticleCureus2020
Seizure Prophylaxis Following Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: Retrospective Investigation of Clinical Practice and the Impact of Clinical Guidelines.
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of Early Seizure Prophylaxis With Posttraumatic Seizures and Mortality: A Meta-analysis With Evidence Quality Assessment.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2023Review
- Seizure Prophylaxis in Young Patients Following Traumatic Brain Injury.Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shockArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Post-traumatic seizure (PTS) is a major complication of traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, there has been controversy in the literature regarding whether anticonvulsants should be used prophylactically to prevent it, and there is significant variability in practice. The objective of this study is to describe seizure prophylaxis practices after moderate to severe TBI and to determine whether the use of seizure prophylaxis increased following the recommendations of the Quebec Institut National d'Excellence en Santé et Services Sociaux and the Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation (INESSS-ONF) guidelines. This study will also compare the characteristics of patients who receive the recommended prophylaxis and those who do not. Methods All adult patients admitted to a level-1 trauma centre for moderate to severe TBI were eligible for this study (n = 96). Medical records including patient age, sex, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, mechanism of injury, and occurrence of PTS were reviewed in a retrospective manner regarding the administration of recommended seizure prophylaxis. Results The proportion of patients receiving the recommended seizure prophylaxis was 8%. There was no significant increase after the release of the INESSS-ONF guidelines (p: 0.38). There were no significant differences in demographics, injury characteristics, or rates of early PTS between patients receiving the recommended prophylaxis and those not receiving it (p: >0.05). Conclusion The results indicate that the use of the recommended seizure prophylaxis after moderate to severe TBI is low and that the release of the INESSS-ONF guidelines did not increase its use. Patient and injury factors do not appear to influence the use of seizure prophylaxis. These results highlight variability in seizure prophylaxis practices and the importance of understanding local practice patterns. Implementation strategies should be identified to increase adherence to the recommendations and improve patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.