Perceived Utility of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference Consensus-Based Analysis and Recommendations

dc.contributor.authorChesnut, Randall M.
dc.contributor.authorAguilera, Sergio
dc.contributor.authorBuki, Andras
dc.contributor.authorBulger, Eileen M.
dc.contributor.authorCiterio, Giuseppe
dc.contributor.authorCooper, D. Jamie
dc.contributor.authorDiaz Arrastia, Ramon
dc.contributor.authorDiringer, Michael
dc.contributor.authorFigaji, Anthony
dc.contributor.authorGao, Guoyi
dc.contributor.authorGeocadin, Romergryko G.
dc.contributor.authorGhajar, Jamshid
dc.contributor.authorHarris, Odette
dc.contributor.authorHawryluk, Gregory W. J.
dc.contributor.authorHoffer, Alan
dc.contributor.authorHutchinson, Peter
dc.contributor.authorJoseph, Mathew
dc.contributor.authorKitagawa, Ryan
dc.contributor.authorManley, Geoffrey
dc.contributor.authorMayer, Stephan
dc.contributor.authorMenon, David K.
dc.contributor.authorMeyfroidt, Geert
dc.contributor.authorMichael, Daniel B.
dc.contributor.authorOddo, Mauro
dc.contributor.authorOkonkwo, David O.
dc.contributor.authorPatel, Mayur B.
dc.contributor.authorRobertson, Claudia
dc.contributor.authorRosenfeld, Jeffrey V.
dc.contributor.authorRubiano, Andres M.
dc.contributor.authorSahuquillo, Juain
dc.contributor.authorServadei, Franco
dc.contributor.authorShutter, Lori
dc.contributor.authorStein, Deborah M.
dc.contributor.authorStocchetti, Nino
dc.contributor.authorTaccone, Fabio Silvio
dc.contributor.authorTimmons, Shelly D.
dc.contributor.authorTsai, Eve C.
dc.contributor.authorUllman, Jamie S.
dc.contributor.authorVidetta, Walter
dc.contributor.authorWright, David W.
dc.contributor.authorZammit, Christopher
dc.contributor.departmentNeurological Surgery, School of Medicine
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-03T08:22:56Z
dc.date.available2024-08-03T08:22:56Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.description.abstractBackground: Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is widely practiced, but the indications are incompletely developed, and guidelines are poorly followed. Objective: To study the monitoring practices of an established expert panel (the clinical working group from the Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference effort) to examine the match between monitoring guidelines and their clinical decision-making and offer guidance for clinicians considering monitor insertion. Methods: We polled the 42 Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference panel members' ICP monitoring decisions for virtual patients, using matrices of presenting signs (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] total or GCS motor, pupillary examination, and computed tomography diagnosis). Monitor insertion decisions were yes, no, or unsure (traffic light approach). We analyzed their responses for weighting of the presenting signs in decision-making using univariate regression. Results: Heatmaps constructed from the choices of 41 panel members revealed wider ICP monitor use than predicted by guidelines. Clinical examination (GCS) was by far the most important characteristic and differed from guidelines in being nonlinear. The modified Marshall computed tomography classification was second and pupils third. We constructed a heatmap and listed the main clinical determinants representing 80% ICP monitor insertion consensus for our recommendations. Conclusion: Candidacy for ICP monitoring exceeds published indicators for monitor insertion, suggesting the clinical perception that the value of ICP data is greater than simply detecting and monitoring severe intracranial hypertension. Monitor insertion heatmaps are offered as potential guidance for ICP monitor insertion and to stimulate research into what actually drives monitor insertion in unconstrained, real-world conditions.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.identifier.citationChesnut RM, Aguilera S, Buki A, et al. Perceived Utility of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference Consensus-Based Analysis and Recommendations. Neurosurgery. 2023;93(2):399-408. doi:10.1227/neu.0000000000002516
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/42591
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherWolters Kluwer
dc.relation.isversionof10.1227/neu.0000000000002516
dc.relation.journalNeurosurgery
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.sourcePMC
dc.subjectAlgorithms
dc.subjectConsensus development
dc.subjectIntracranial hypertension
dc.subjectIntracranial pressure monitoring
dc.subjectNeurocritical care
dc.subjectPractice guidelines
dc.subjectTraumatic brain injury
dc.titlePerceived Utility of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference Consensus-Based Analysis and Recommendations
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Chesnut2023Perceived-CCBYNCND.pdf
Size:
1.36 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.04 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: