Index > Vol. 42/2010 > Iss. 2/February > pp. 97-110 > Abstract
Review article

Comprehensive rehabilitation programmes in the chronic phase after severe brain injury: A systematic review

doi: 10.2340/16501977-0508

Abstract:

Objective: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the effectiveness of comprehensive rehabilitation programmes for adults in the chronic phase after severe acquired brain injury.
Methods: PubMed, PsychINFO and PsychLit were searched for articles published between 1990 and 2008 and a quality assessment was performed. The comprehensive programmes were subdivided into neurobehavioral interventions, residential community reintegration and day-treatment programmes. The extracted data included study characteristics, patient characteristics and intervention characteristics.
Results: Thirteen studies met pre-established criteria. Two studies were randomized controlled trials, 5 were controlled comparative studies and 6 were uncontrolled longitudinal cohort studies. Overall, their methodological quality was limited. The investigated programmes led to substantial improvement in daily life functioning and community integration of severe chronic brain injury patients, with lasting effects at follow-up. Day-treatment programmes had the highest level of evidence.
Conclusion: Comprehensive rehabilitation programmes appear to be effective in terms of a reduction in psychosocial problems, a higher level of community integration and an increase in employment. Although this is the first review to differentiate between specific programmes, clear-cut clinical recommendations cannot yet be set out due to limited methodological quality and poor description of patient and intervention characteristics. Specific recommendations for future studies are given.

Authors:

Gert J Geurtsen, Caroline M van Heugten, Juan D Martina, Alexander C.H. Geurts

Key words:

brain injury; rehabilitation; comprehensive rehabilitation; review; adult; middle-aged.

References

  1. Yates PJ. Psychological adjustment, social enablement and community integration following acquired brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil 2003; 13: 291–306. Link to article
  2. Carney N, Chesnut RM, Maynard H, Mann NC, Patterson P, Hefland M. Effect of cognitive rehabilitation on outcomes for persons with traumatic brain injury: a systematic review. J Head Trauma Rehabil 1999; 14: 277–307. Link to article
  3. Doig E, Fleming J, Tooth L. Patterns of community integration 2–5 years post-discharge from brain injury rehabilitation. Brain Inj 2001; 15: 747–762.
  4. Gainotti G. Neuropsychology of emotions. In: Denes G, Pizzamiglio L, editors. Handbook of clinical and experimental neuropsychology. Hove, East Sussex: Psychology Press; 1999, p. 613–633.
  5. Rao V, Lyketsos CG. Neuropsychiatric sequelae of traumatic brain injury. Psychosomatics 2000; 41: 95–103. Link to article
  6. Malec JF, Basford JS. Postacute brain injury rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 77: 198–207. Link to article
  7. Ben-Yishay Y. Prigatano GP. Cognitive remediation. In: Rosenthal M, Griffith ER, Bond MR, Miller JD, editors. Rehabilitation of the adult and child with traumatic brain injury. 2nd edition. Philidelphia: Davis; 1990, p. 393–400.
  8. Cicerone KD, Dahlberg C, Kalmar K, Langenbahn DM, Malec JF, Bergquist TF, et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: recommendations for clinical practice. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000; 81: 1596–1615. Link to article
  9. Cicerone KD, Dahlberg C, Malec JF, Langenbahn DM, Felicetti T, Kneipp S, et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 1998 through 2002. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86: 1681–1692. Link to article
  10. Turner-Stokes L. Evidence for the effectiveness of multi-disciplinary rehabilitation following acquired brain injury: a synthesis of two systematic approaches. J Rehabil Med 2008; 40: 691–701.
  11. Rees L, Marshall S, Hartridge C, Mackie D, Weiser M for the Erabi group. Cognitive interventions post aquired brain injury. Brain Inj 2007; 21: 161–200. Link to article
  12. Consort-Statement.org. [homepage on the internet]. Transparent Reporting of Trials [updated Oct 22 2007; cited Sep 2008]. Available from: http://www.consort-statement.org/
  13. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, Olkin I, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996; 276: 637–639. Link to article
  14. Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A, Schulz K, Altman DG, Hill C, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust 2006; 185: 263–267.
  15. Hopewell S, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF. Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal “Instructions to Authors”. Trials 2008; 9: 20. Link to article
  16. Altman DG. Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by high impact medical journals: survey of instructions for authors. BMJ 2005; 330: 1056–1057. Link to article
  17. Geurts ACH, Visschers BJAT, Limbeek J van, Ribbers GM. Systematic review of aetiology and treatment of post-stroke hand oedema and shoulder-hand syndrome. Scand J Rehabil Med 2000; 32: 4–10. Link to article
  18. Cicerone KD, Mott T, Azulay J, Sharlow-Galella MA, Ellmo WJ, Paradise S, et al. A randomized clinical trial of holistic neuropsychologic rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008; 89: 2239–2249. Link to article
  19. Ruff RM, Nieman H. Cognitive rehabilitation versus day treatment in head-injured adults: is there an impact on emotional and psychosocial adjustment? Brain Inj 1990; 4: 339–347. Link to article
  20. Rattock J, Ben-Yishay Y, Ezrachi O, Lakin P, Piasetsky E, Ross B, et al. Outcome of different treatment mixes in a multidimensional neuropsychological rehabilitation program. Neuropsychology 1992; 6: 395–415. Link to article
  21. Cicerone KD, Mott T, Azulay J, Friel JC. Community integration and satisfaction with functioning after intensive cognitive rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85: 943–950. Link to article
  22. Sarajuuri JM, Kaipo ML, Koskinen SK, Niemela MR, Serva AR, Juhani SV. Outcome of a comprehensive neurorehabilitation program for patients with traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86: 2296–2302. Link to article
  23. Hashimoto K, Okamoto T, Watanabe S, Ohashi M. Effectiveness of a comprehensive day treatment program for rehabilitation of patients with aquired brain injury in Japan. J Rehabil Med 2006; 38: 20–25. Link to article
  24. Willer B, Button J, Rempel R. Residential and home-based rehabilitation of individuals with traumatic brain injury: a case control study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80: 399–406. Link to article
  25. Christensen AL. Outpatient management and outcome in relation to work in traumatic brain injury patients. Scand J Rehabil Med 1992; 5: 155–168.
  26. Teasdale TW, Christensen A, Pinner EM. Psychosocial rehabilitation of cranial trauma and stroke patients. Brain Inj 1993; 7: 535–542. Link to article
  27. Malec JF. Impact of comprehensive day treatment on societal participation for persons with aquired brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 885–895. Link to article
  28. Gray DS, Burnham RS. Prelimary outcome analysis of a long term rehabilitation program for severe acquired brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000; 8: 1447–1456.
  29. Geurtsen GJ, Martina JD, Heugten CM van, Geurts ACH. A prospective study to evaluate a new residential community integration programme for severe chronic brain injury: The Brain Integration Programme. Brain Inj 2008; 22: 545–554. Link to article
  30. Wood RLl, McCrea JD, Wood LM, Merriman RN. Clinical and cost effectivenesss of post-acute neurobehavioural rehabilitation. Brain Inj 1999; 13: 68–88.
  31. Lezak MD. Neuropsychological assessment. New York: Oxford University Press; 1995.
  32. Wade DT. Describing rehabilitation interventions: editorial. Clin Rehabil 2005; 19: 811–818. Link to article
  33. van Baalen B, Odding E, van Woensel MP, Roebroeck ME. Reliability and sensitivity to change of measurement instruments used in a traumatic brain injury population. Clin Rehabil 2006; 20; 686–700. Link to article
  34. Salter K, Foley N, Jutai J, Bayley M. Assessment of community integration follwing traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj 2008; 22: 820–835. Link to article
  35. Chiu WT, Huang SJ, Hwang HF, Tsauo JV, Chen CF, Tsai SH, et al. Use of the WHOQOL-BREF for evaluating persons with traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 2006; 23: 1609–1620. Link to article
  36. McCauley SR, Pedroza C, Brown SA, Boake C, Levin HS, Goodman HS, et al. Confirmatory factor structure of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) in mild-to-moderate brain injury. Brain Inj 2006; 20: 519–529. Link to article
  37. Winstanley J, Simpson G, Tate R, Myles B. Early indicators and contributors to psychological distress in relatives during rehabilitation following severe traumatic brain injury: findings from the brain injury outcomes study. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2006; 21: 453–466. Link to article
  38. Bouwens SFM, Heugten CM van, Verhey FJR. The practical use of goal attainment scaling for people with acquired brain injury who receive cognitive rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil 2009; 23: 310–320. Link to article
  39. Meythaler JM, Peduzzi JD, Eleftheriou E, Novack TA. Current concepts: diffuse axonal injury-associated traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 1461–1471. Link to article
  40. Wilson B. Cognitive rehabilitation: how it is and how it might be. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 1997; 3: 487–496.