Beraldo Renato Fedatto, Pereira Marcelo Charles, Liebl Bruno, Garg Kanwaljeet, Deora Harsh, Harland Tessa A, Pahwa Bhavya, de Souza Araújo Paulo Victor, Pereira Silvestre Pedro Afonso, Henrique Weiler Ceccato Guilherme, Piedade Guilherme Santos, Demartini Zeferino, Chaurasia Bipin
Department of Neurosurgery, Catholic Pontificate University of Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Albany Medical Centre, Albany, New York, USA.
World Neurosurg. 2025 Feb;194:123608. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2024.123608. Epub 2025 Jan 28.
Traumatic brain injury management guidelines vary across regions and there is limited research on real-world adherence to these guidelines. We conducted a global survey to assess the adherence of neurosurgeons to traumatic brain injury guidelines and evidence-based medicine (EBM).
A 24-item survey was created using Google Forms, covering demographic information, neurotrauma training, basic knowledge of EBM, and surgical and in-hospital management.
Responses were collected from 233 neurosurgeons across 53 different countries. Approximately 45% of respondents reported not staying up to date with Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines, and 48% indicated a preference for relying on their own experience over EBM guidelines. Neurosurgeons from Asia and Africa were more likely to rely on personal experience, while those from Europe and North/Central and South America leaned toward EBM (P = 0.021). Additionally, 56% of respondents reported that their neurotrauma management at least sometimes diverged from recommended guidelines. Specifically, 58% never or rarely managed epidural hematoma of 30 cm³ conservatively, and 45% sometimes, often, or always treated subdural hematomas conservatively, even when EBM recommended surgery. Moreover, 24% at least sometimes managed patients conservatively despite a Glasgow Coma Scale score of less than 9 or a decrease of 2 or more points. In cerebellar hematomas, 46% sometimes opted for external ventricular drainage alone.
Neurosurgeons from Europe and North/Central and South America tend to follow EBM guidelines more closely, while those from Asia and Africa often favor individual decision-making approaches.
创伤性脑损伤的管理指南因地区而异,关于现实中对这些指南的遵循情况的研究有限。我们开展了一项全球调查,以评估神经外科医生对创伤性脑损伤指南和循证医学(EBM)的遵循情况。
使用谷歌表单创建了一份包含24个条目的调查问卷,内容涵盖人口统计学信息、神经创伤培训、循证医学基础知识以及手术和院内管理。
收集了来自53个不同国家的233名神经外科医生的回复。约45%的受访者表示未及时了解脑创伤基金会的指南,48%的受访者表示更倾向于依靠自身经验而非循证医学指南。来自亚洲和非洲的神经外科医生更倾向于依靠个人经验,而来自欧洲以及北美洲/中美洲和南美洲的医生则倾向于循证医学(P = 0.021)。此外,56%的受访者表示他们的神经创伤管理至少有时与推荐指南不一致。具体而言,58%的人从未或很少对30立方厘米的硬膜外血肿进行保守治疗,45%的人有时、经常或总是对硬膜下血肿进行保守治疗,即使循证医学推荐手术。此外,24%的人至少有时对格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分低于9分或下降2分及以上的患者进行保守治疗。在小脑血肿方面,46%的人有时仅选择进行脑室外引流。
来自欧洲以及北美洲/中美洲和南美洲的神经外科医生往往更严格遵循循证医学指南,而来自亚洲和非洲的医生则常常倾向于个人决策方法。