Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T12:03:04.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

79 Role of Neurocritical Care Physicians in Traumatic Brain Injury Systems of Care and Research: Perspectives from Provider Surveys

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2023

Roy A. Poblete
Affiliation:
Keck Medicine of The University of Southern California
Chris Nguyen
Affiliation:
Keck Medicine of The University of Southern California
Patrick D. Lyden
Affiliation:
Keck Medicine of The University of Southern California
William D. Freeman
Affiliation:
Mayo Clinic
Gene Sung
Affiliation:
Keck Medicine of The University of Southern California
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The purpose of this small survey-based study was to characterize the current role of neurocritical care physicians in traumatic brain injury (TBI) systems of care and research. In doing so, we aim to highlight potential roles of neurology providers in the medical management and enhancement of translational science in the field of TBI. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Between April and June 2021, a web-based survey was disseminated by email to members of the Neurocritical Care Society. The survey was open to all physician providers. A total of 36 surveys were completed. The survey consisted of 18 questions with pre-defined answer choices. Survey questions aimed to determine areas of practice, primary clinical specialty, hospital practice setting, provider involvement in TBI care, provider involvement in TBI research, and current research roles. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: 92% of survey respondents were in the United States (n=33), representing all national regions. 75% of the physicians were neurocritical care trained (n=27). 69% of providers were practicing in academic institutions while 78% were at sites designated as Level I trauma centers. All respondents managed acute TBI, but 50% served as consultants rather than being the primary service provider. At their sites of practice, 31% of patients were on non-neuroscience services, especially those with non-neurologic traumatic injury. Only 36% reported that TBI protocols were written and adhered to at their site. Only 44% reported that TBI research was performed at their site, while 50% had interest in participating in TBI research. TBI was the primary area of research for 17% of physicians. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This small physician survey highlights heterogeneity in TBI systems-based practice and research roles. Areas of potential improvement include greater involvement of neurocritical care physicians in TBI management, protocol-building and implementation, and TBI research. Reasons for current barriers are multifactorial and will be discussed.

Type
Contemporary Research Challenges
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. The Association for Clinical and Translational Science