Techniques being used to treat traumatic brain injuries, the signature wounds suffered by troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, appear to be helpful but lack rigorous scientific support, a government-appointed panel reported on Monday after completing the most comprehensive analysis of the evidence to date.
The new report, done by the Institute of Medicine at the request of the Department of Defense, concluded that some specific methods — the use of special daily diaries, for instance, to improve memory — were backed by more evidence than others. But over all the field was short of both good research and decent standards to administer treatments or measure their effects.
Such rehabilitation methods have come under intense scrutiny from family member of veterans who suffered traumatic brain injuries, including those caused by nonpenetrating blasts, as well as wounds from bombs, bullets or blows to the head. Some 20 percent of service members wounded inIraq and Afghanistan have suffered blows to the face, neck or head, and the number of brain injuries has nearly tripled in the past decade, to more than 30,000 from 11,000.
About 1.7 million American civilians each year suffer traumatic brain injury, many from car accidents.
“I think the panel had a slight bias toward wanting these therapies to work, but at the same time it did not overstate the evidence,” said Jordan Grafman, director of the Traumatic Brain Injury Research Laboratory at the Kessler Research Foundation in West Orange, N.J., who was not on the committee.
Dr. Grafman said that applying cognitive rehab techniques, which focus on improving memory, attention and decision making, “is almost a no-lose proposition. It’s like going to school; you should get better at what you practice and you shouldn’t get worse.”
The expert panel reviewed 90 studies published from 1991 to 2011, involving thousands of patients. Some of their injuries were mild, causing subtle memory deficits; others were severe and disabling. The therapies aimed to improve overall functioning, or to achieve more specific goals, like remembering appointments and chores or organizing and planning tasks.
The panel rated two types of treatment, one focused on memory and the other on social skills, as having a “modest” evidence base. It rated other techniques — for sharpening organizational skills, sustaining focus or improving overall functioning — lower still, with only a hint of evidence to back them up.
The researchers found no evidence that any treatment led to enduring, long-term improvements. The trials they analyzed lasted no more than a few months, and many lasted only weeks..
Dr. Ira Shoulson, a professor of neurology at Georgetown University Medical Center, said that evaluating traumatic brain injury treatment was inherently difficult because the severity of injuries varies so widely, techniques are often tailored to individuals, and veterans in particular come in with compound problems, including chronic pain, post-traumatic stress and depression. The people providing the therapy — nurses, social workers, doctors, psychologists and, ultimately, family members — also vary from case to case. And the approach for each individual often has several components, leaving scientists to ask which made a difference.“That’s a lot of moving targets,” Dr. Shoulson said. He and fellow panel members called for larger, better-designed trials that use agreed-upon tools to measure effects — something the field is only just beginning to develop.
As a rule, therapists do not begin intensive cognitive rehab until months after an injury, to give brain tissue a chance to heal. But the molecular processes underlying this repair are themselves not very well understood, Dr. Grafman said.
This should change with time. The new report lists more than two dozen large trials under way or about to start, through the Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs or other government agencies. The agencies have set up a data-sharing system — the first step toward standardization in a field that, all experts agree, needs to grow up fast.
www.nytimes.com Share this post :
|
|
