PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

K Kiening

Publications and source records attributed to K Kiening.

12 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

BrainIT: a trans-national head injury monitoring research network.

BACKGROUND: Studies of therapeutic interventions and management strategies on head injured patients are difficult to undertake. BrainIT provides validated data for analysis available to centers that contribute data to allow post-hoc analysis and hypothesis testing. METHODS: Both physiological and intensive care management data are collected. Patient identification is eliminated prior to transfer of data to a central database in Glasgow. Requests for missing/ ambiguous data are sent back to the local center. Country coordinating centers provide advice, training, and assistance to centers and manage the data validation process. RESULTS: Currently 30 centers participate in the group. Data collection started in January 2004 and 242 patients have been recruited. Data validation tools were developed to ensure data accuracy and all analysis must be undertaken on validated data. CONCLUSION: BrainIT is an open, collaborative network that has been established with primary objectives of i) creating a core data set of information, ii) standardizing the collection methodology, iii) providing data collection tools, iv) creating and populating a data base for future analysis, and v) establishing data validation methodologies. Improved standards for multi-center data collection should permit the more accurate analysis of monitoring and management studies in head injured patients.

Biomedical Research↗
PubMed2005

Continuous cerebral compliance monitoring in severe head injury: its relationship with intracranial pressure and cerebral perfusion pressure.

BACKGROUND: Cerebral compliance expresses the capability to buffer an intracranial volume increase while avoiding a rise in intracranial pressure (ICP). The autoregulatory response to Cerebral Perfusion Pressure (CPP) variation influences cerebral blood volume which is an important determinant of compliance. The direction of compliance change in relation to CPP variation is still under debate. The aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between CPP and compliance in traumatic brain injured (TBI) patients by a new method for continuous monitoring of intracranial compliance as used in neuro-intensive care (NICU). METHOD: Three European NICU's standardised collection of CPP, compliance and ICP data to a joint database. Data were analyzed using an unpaired student t-test and a multi-level statistical model. RESULTS: For each variable 108,263 minutes of data were recorded from 21 TBI patients (19 patients GCS</=8; 90% male; age 10-77 y). The average value for the following parameters were: ICP 15.1+/-8.9 mmHg, CPP 74.3+/-14 mmHg and compliance 0.68+/-0.3 ml/mmHg. ICP was >/=20 mmHg in 20% and CPP<60 mmHg for 10.7% of the time. Compliance was lower (0.51+/-0.34 ml/mmHg) at ICP>/=20 than at ICP<20 mmHg (0.73+/-0.37 ml/mmHg) (p<0.0001). Compliance was significantly lower at CPP<60 than at CPP>/=60 mmHg: 0.56+/-0.36 and 0.70+/-0.37 ml/mmHg respectively (p<0.0001). The CPP - compliance relationship was different when ICP was above 20 mmHg compared with below 20 mmHg. At ICP<20 mmHg compliance rose as CPP rose. At ICP>/=20 mmHg, the relation curve was convexly shaped. At low CPP, the compliance was between 0.20 and 0.30 ml/mmHg. As the CPP reach 80 mmHg average compliance was 0.55 ml/mmHg., but compliance fell to 0.40 ml/mmHg when CPP was 100 mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: Low CPP levels are confirmed to be detrimental for intracranial compliance. Moreover, when ICP was pathological, indicating unstable intracranial equilibrium, a high CPP level was also associated with a low volume-buffering capacity.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Survey of traumatic brain injury management in European Brain-IT centres year 2001.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to obtain basic knowledge about the current local conditions and neurointensive care of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in the new multi-centre collaborative BrainIT group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey comprised a background part on local policies (Part A), and a case study section (Part B). The information was gathered by questionnaire followed by telephone interviews. Twenty-three BrainIT centres participated in the survey and answers from two respondents were available from 18 of the sites. RESULTS: The average proportion of agreement between duplicate respondents was 0.778 (range 0.415-1.00). All BrainIT centres monitored ICP. The treatment protocols seem to have a pattern concerning escalation of treatment of intracranial hypertension: 1/ evacuation of mass lesions and head elevation; 2/ increased sedation and mannitol; 3/ hyperventilation; 4/ ventricular drainage; 5/ craniectomy and barbituates. CONCLUSIONS: There seemed to be an agreement on neurointensive care policies within the BrainIT group. The suggested order of treatment was generally in accordance with published guidelines although the suggested order and combinations of different treatments varied. Variation of treatment within the range of prescribed standards provides optimal conditions for an interesting future analysis of treatment and monitoring data in reality using the BrainIT database.

Brain Injuries↗
PubMed2005

The BrainIT Group: concept and current status 2004.

INTRODUCTION: An open collaborative international network has been established which aims to improve inter-centre standards for collection of high-resolution, neurointensive care data on patients with traumatic brain injury. The group is also working towards the creation of an open access, detailed and validated database that will be useful for hypothesis generation. In Part A, we describe the underlying concept of the group and it's aims and in Part B we describe the current status of the groups development. METHODS: Four group meetings funded by the EEC have enabled definition of a "Core Dataset" to be collected from all centres regardless of specific project aim. A form based feasibility study was conducted and a prospective data collection exercise of core data using PC and hand held computer based methods is in progress. FINDINGS: A core-dataset was defined and can be downloaded from the BrainIT web-site (go to "Core dataset" link at: www.brainit.org). A form based feasibility study was conducted showing the overall feasibility for collection of the core data elements was high. Software tools for collection of the core dataset have been developed. Currently, 130 patient's data from 16 European centres have been recruited to the joint database as part of an EEC funded proof of concept study. INTERPRETATION: The BrainIT network provides a more standardised and higher resolution data collection mechanism for research groups, organisations and the device industry to conduct multicentre trials of new health care technology in patients with traumatic brain injury.

Brain Injuries↗
PubMed2005

Accurate data collection for head injury monitoring studies: a data validation methodology.

BACKGROUND: BrainIT is a multi centre, European project, to collect high quality continuous data from severely head injured patients using a previously defined [6] core data set. This includes minute-by-minute physiological data and simultaneous treatment and management information. It is crucial that the data is correctly collected and validated. METHODS: Minute-by-minute physiological monitoring data is collected from the bedside monitors. Demographic and clinical information, intensive care management and secondary insult management data, are collected using a handheld computer. Data is transferred from the handheld device to a local computer where it is reviewed and anonymised before being sent electronically, with the physiological data, to the central database in Glasgow. Automated computer tools highlight missing or ambiguous data. A request is then sent to the contributing centre where the data is amended and returned to Glasgow. Of the required data elements 20% are randomly selected for validation against original documentation along with the actual number of specific episodic events during a known period. This will determine accuracy and the percentage of missing data for each record. CONCLUSION: Advances in patient care require an improved evidence base. For accurate, consistent and repeatable data collection, robust mechanisms are required which should enhance the reliability of clinical trials, assessment of management protocols and equipment evaluations.

Brain Injuries↗
PubMed2004

R3-survey of traumatic brain injury management in European Brain IT centres year 2001.

OBJECTIVE: To obtain knowledge about the conditions and management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in a collaborative network of Brain Information Technology centres. DESIGN: The Brain IT (Brain monitoring with Information Technology) survey comprised two parts: local conditions and policies (part A), and a case study part (part B). The information was gathered by written questionnaires followed by telephone interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four Brain IT centres participated (two respondents from 18 sites). RESULTS: The average proportion of agreement between duplicate respondents was 0.79 (range 0.44-1.00). All Brain IT centres monitored ICP. The reported order of treatment for intracranial hypertension was: evacuation of mass-lesions and head elevation (1), increase of sedation and Mannitol scheme (2), hyperventilation (3), ventricular drainage (4), craniectomy and pentothal coma (5), and decompressive lobectomy (6). The respondents were less prone to evacuate expansive contusions in relation to extra cerebral hematomas. The most common suggested interventions (alone or in combination) for treatment of intracranial hypertension without mass lesions was the Mannitol scheme (included in 71% of the suggestions), CSF drainage (included in 56%), hyperventilation (included in 32%), and pentothal coma (included in 22%). CONCLUSIONS: The suggested management of TBI was mainly in accordance with published guidelines, although a minor proportion of the answers deviated to some extent. The suggested order and combinations of different treatment interventions varied. Variation of treatment within the range of prescribed standards provides optimal conditions for an interesting future analysis of treatment and monitoring data as collected prospectively in a Brain IT database.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

The BrainIT group: concept and core dataset definition.

INTRODUCTION: An open collaborative international network has been established which aims to improve inter-centre standards for collection of high-resolution, neurointensive care data on patients with traumatic brain injury. The group is also working towards the creation of an open access, detailed and validated database that will be useful for post-hoc hypothesis testing. In Part A, the underlying concept, the group coordination structure, membership guidelines and database access and publication criteria are described. Secondly, in part B, we describe a set of meetings funded by the EEC that allowed us to define a "Core Dataset" and we present the results of a feasibility exercise for collection of this core dataset. METHODS: Four group meetings funded by the EEC have enabled definition of a "Core Dataset" to be collected from all centres regardless of specific project aim. A paper based pilot collection of data was conducted to determine the feasibility for collection of the core dataset. Specially designed forms to collect the core dataset demographic and clinical information as well as sample the time-series data elements were distributed by both email and standard mail to 22 BrainIT centres. A deadline of two months was set to receive completed forms back from centres. A pilot data collection of minute by minute physiological monitoring data was also performed. FINDINGS: A core-dataset was defined and can be downloaded from the BrainIT web-site (go to "Core dataset" link at: www.brainit.org). Eighteen centres (82%) returned completed forms by the set deadline. Overall the feasibility for collection of the core data elements was high with only 10 of the 64 questions (16%) showing missing data. Of those 10 fields with missing data, the average number of centres not responding was 12% and the median 6%. An SQL database to hold the data has been designed and is being tested. Software tools for collection of the core dataset have been developed. Ethics approval has been granted for collection of multi-centre data as part of a pilot data collection study. INTERPRETATION: The BrainIT network provides a more standardised and higher resolution data collection mechanism for research groups, organisations and the device industry to conduct multi-centre trials of new health care technology in patients with traumatic brain injury.

Brain Injuries↗
PubMed2002

Multi-centre assessment of the Spiegelberg compliance monitor: interim results.

Analyses of a multi-centre database of 71 patients at risk of raised ICP showed that in head injured patients (n = 19) and tumour patients (n = 13) clear inverse relationships of ICP vs compliance exist. SAH patients (n = 5) appear to exhibit a biphasic relationship between ICP and compliance, however greater numbers of patients need to be recruited to this group. Patients with hydrocephalus (n = 34) show an initial decrease in compliance while ICP is less than 20 mmHg, thereafter compliance does not show a dependence upon ICP. A power analysis confirmed that sufficient numbers of patients have been recruited in the hydrocephalus group and a ROC analysis determined that a mean compliance value of 0.809 (lower and upper 95% CL = 0.725 & 0.894 resp.) was a critical threshold for raised ICP greater than 10 mmHg. Preliminary time-series analyses of the ICP and compliance data is revealing evidence that the cumulative time compliance is in a low compliance state (< 0.5 ml/mmHg), as a proportion of total monitoring time, increases more rapidly than the cumulative time ICP is greater than 25 mmHg. Before trials testing compliance thresholds can be designed, we need to consider not just the absolute threshold, but the duration of time spent below threshold. A survey may be required to identify a consensus of what is the minimum duration of raised ICP above 25 mmHg needed to instigate treatment.

Automation↗
PubMed2000

Multi-centre assessment of the Spiegelberg compliance monitor: preliminary results.

Acute brain injury states (e.g. head injury, subarachnoid haemorrhage) show clear inverse relationships of ICP vs compliance, with ICP instability at times of lower compliance states. Variance in compliance values is large in hydrocephalus where ICP is relatively lower and compliance higher. Nonetheless, early experience shows that compliance data influence decisions on CSF diversion treatments. Future work will focus on the ability of intracranial compliance to predict ensuing ICP instability and methodological refinement for monitoring patients who have higher compliance states.

Brain↗
PubMed1993

Long-term observations of intracranial pressure after severe head injury. The phenomenon of secondary rise of intracranial pressure.

The long-term course of intracranial pressure (ICP) was studied in 53 patients from a group of 90 patients with severe head injury treated over a 3-year period. In 49 of these, ICP was significantly elevated during the observation period. The maximum in ICP was usually observed 24 to 96 hours posttrauma. A subgroup of patients developed a second rise of ICP. Such a course was observed in 15 (31%) of the 49 patients with intracranial hypertension. In these cases, ICP increased initially to 20 to 30 mm Hg but could be controlled. Thereafter, ICP was decreased again for at least 12 hours. The secondary ICP rise occurred 3 to 10 days after trauma. In six patients, intracranial hypertension became uncontrollable and eventually caused brain death. The outcome of patients with a secondary rise of ICP was worse when compared with that of patients without this complication. A cause of the secondary ICP rise could only be identified in some cases. Delayed traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage, traumatic vasospasm, hypoxia, and hyponatremia were diagnosed in seven cases. In seven other patients, the secondary ICP rise coincided with a pronounced leukocytosis, which was not associated with apparent infections. Because the occurrence and degree of a secondary rise of ICP after severe head injury are important factors affecting outcome, monitoring of ICP after severe head injury should be prolonged.

Adolescent↗