Challenges to Secondary Brain Injury Prevention in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury
AuthorKeller, Kristen Jo
Committee ChairGallek, Matthew
MetadataShow full item record
PublisherThe University of Arizona.
RightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
AbstractBACKGROUND/AIMS: Inconsistency in the use of secondary brain injury prevention guidelines among US trauma centers after severe traumatic brain injury is prevalent in many literature sources. However, this phenomenon has not been thoroughly studied. The purpose of this DNP project is to identify the key barriers and challenges in compliance to the evidence-based guidelines for secondary brain injury prevention. DESIGN: An exploratory, emergent design was used to collect descriptive qualitative data through the use of a survey. SETTING: Six Phoenix Metropolitan Level 1 trauma centers. PARTICIPANTS: All survey participants who consented to survey completion, which had greater than six months of experience and directly worked with patients suffering from a severe TBI in the clinical setting. MEASUREMENTS: Participant demographics (work experience, area of work, job title), current awareness and use of Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines, and time duration for evidence based order set implementation. Narrative responses were also used to identify barriers to current use of the BTF guidelines and factors that may promote their use in the future. RESULTS: A total of 43 participants consented to the survey study, with completion by 35 participants. RNs (n=27), Physicians (n=2), NPs or PAs (n=5), with an average work experience of 6 to 14 years (42.86%). A total of n=22 (62%) of participants were unaware of the current BTF guidelines for severe TBI and only 25% (n=9) aware that their facility has a protocol based on the BTF guidelines for severe TBI, while 51% (n=18) were unsure if their facility had a protocol. Barriers were identified in narrative form and were consistent with awareness/education, provider congruence, communication, and order set/protocol process improvement. CONCLUSION: The understanding of current patient management for severe TBI based on the BTF guidelines is sporadic among the greater Phoenix area Level 1 trauma centers. Requiring proof of BTF guidelines compliance by the ACS at time of Level 1 certification may increase the consistent recommended use of the BTF guidelines for the care of severe TBIs.
Degree ProgramGraduate College