1 / 25

Evidence-based and Ethical Practice in Rehabilitation for TBI and Polytrauma

Evidence-based and Ethical Practice in Rehabilitation for TBI and Polytrauma. James F. Malec, PhD, ABPP-Cn,Rp Research Director Rehabilitation Hospital of Indiana Professor Emeritus, Mayo Clinic. Evidence-based Practice. Ethical Practice. Strengths of Evidence-based practice.

lillian
Download Presentation

Evidence-based and Ethical Practice in Rehabilitation for TBI and Polytrauma

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Evidence-based and Ethical Practice in Rehabilitation for TBI and Polytrauma James F. Malec, PhD, ABPP-Cn,Rp Research Director Rehabilitation Hospital of Indiana Professor Emeritus, Mayo Clinic

  2. Evidence-based Practice Ethical Practice

  3. Strengths of Evidence-based practice • Scientific validation of procedures • Quality of scientific support is explicit • Class I: Randomized controlled trials • Class II: Nonrandomized controls • Class II: Uncontrolled case series or reports • The ideal (rarely achieved): • Replicated validation of what intervention is best delivered when to whom and by whom

  4. Risks and Weaknesses of Evidence-based Practice • Limits practice (and reimbursement) to those procedures with Class I evidence • Experimental controls limit generalizability of findings • Efficacy vs. effectiveness • Inattention to individual differences

  5. Risks and Weaknesses of Evidence-based practice • Inattention to individual preferences • Dismissal of the value of placebo and nonspecific effects • RCT is not the appropriate methodology for evaluating some interventions • Medical Model vs. Social Model

  6. Medical Model vs. Social Model • Medical Model: • Intervention directed at the individual who is ill or injured • Social Model: • Intervention directed at the social system in which the “disabled” or “ill” person operates

  7. The Evidence • Early medical intervention and monitoring for TBI • Few if any specific studies of polytrauma in theatre of war • Early rehabilitation • Inpatient • Outpatient

  8. The Evidence • Cognitive rehabilitation • Attention • Postacute • Practice with strategies • Memory • Mnemonics • External aids • Executive cognitive abilities

  9. The Evidence • Emotional and behavioral interventions • Prevalent depression • Vs. limited awareness of impairment • Abulia vs. disinhibition • Negative impact on outcome • Treatment efficacy?

  10. The Evidence • Family intervention • Significant minority with family stress at time of injury • Negative impact on outcome • Treatment efficacy? • Efficacy of supportive interventions?

  11. The Evidence • Substance abuse evaluation • Significant minority with abuse/addiction • Negative impact on outcome • Treatment efficacy?

  12. The Evidence • Vocational intervention • Apparently effective • Appropriate for RCT methodology? • Value of nonspecific effects

  13. A Brief HistoryOf Community Based Employment (CBE) after Moderate-Severe TBI (90%+ of mild cases return to work)

  14. Reviews 1985 Corthell et al 1987 Ben-Yishay et al 1993 Wehman et al Studies 1998 Gollaher et al 2002 TBIMS 2003 Kreutzer et al % Working 1 Yr Post < 30% 10-20% 30-40% 31% 27% 34% Without Specific Intervention

  15. Study 1984 Prigatano et al 1987 Ben-Yishay et al 1991 Cope et al 1993 Wehman et al 1994 Prigatano et al 1999 Braverman et al 2000 Malec et al % Working 1 Yr Post 50% 77% 61% 71% 87% 96% 81% With Specific Intervention

  16. Summary • Most optimistic estimates of CBE after moderate to severe TBI without specific intervention = 30-40% employed • Lowest reports with specific intervention = 30-40% unemployed

  17. Vocational Independence Scale • Competitive: Community-based work (at least 15 hours per week) without external supports • Transitional: Community-based work (at least 15 hours per week) with temporary supports, such as, job coach, reduced hours OR enrollment in an educational or training program • Supported: Community-based work with permanent supports or less than 15 hours per week OR volunteer work • Sheltered: Work in a sheltered workshop • Unemployed

  18. Vocational Outcome: VCC #1

  19. Vocational Outcome: VCC #2

  20. The Evidence • Follow-up • Telephone follow-up and referral improves outcome • How much? How long? • Value of support network? • Nonspecific effects

  21. Ethics and Evidence-based Practice • Ethics a set of rules vs. a level of awareness?

  22. Ethical Awareness in Practice • Awareness of current scientific knowledge and best practices • Awareness of current situation • Awareness of individual needs and preferences • Ongoing monitoring and feedback: • changing situation, needs, preferences • Avoiding making things worse (above all do no harm)

  23. References • Brain Trauma Foundation. AANS/ACNS Joint Section on Neurotrauma and Critical Care. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 2007; 24 Suppl 1. • Gordon WA et al. Traumatic brain injury rehabilitation: State of the science. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2006;85:343–382. • Cicerone KD et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: recommendations for clinical practice. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000;81: 1596-1615. • Cicerone KD et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: Updated review of the literature from 1998 through 2002. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005:86;1681-92. • Malec JF. Vocational rehabilitation. In High WM et al (Eds.) Rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury. New York: Oxford 2005

  24. jim.malec@rhin.com

  25. Gordon WA et al. Traumatic brain injury rehabilitation: State of the science. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2006;85:343–382.

More Related