JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
VALIDATION STUDY
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

The Parkland Protocol's modified Berne-Norwood criteria predict two tiers of risk for traumatic brain injury progression.

Journal of Neurotrauma 2014 October 16
As a basis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis after traumatic brain injury (TBI), we have previously published an algorithm known as the Parkland Protocol. Patients are classified by risk for spontaneous progression of hemorrhage with chemoprophylaxis regimens tailored to each tier. We sought to validate this schema. In our algorithm, patients with any of the following are classified "low risk" for spontaneous progression: subdural hemorrhage ≤8 mm thick; epidural hemorrhage ≤8 mm thick; contusions ≤20 mm in diameter; a single contusion per lobe; any amount of subarachnoid hemorrhage; or any amount of intraventricular hemorrhage. Patients with any injury exceeding these are "moderate risk" for progression, and any patient receiving a monitor or craniotomy is "high risk." From February 2010 to November 2012, TBI patients were entered into a dedicated database tracking injury types and sizes, risk category at presentation, and progression on subsequent computed tomgraphies (CTs). The cohort (n=414) was classified as low risk (n=200), moderate risk (n=75), or high risk (n=139) after first CT. After repeat CT scan, radiographic progression was noted in 27% of low-risk, 53% of moderate-risk, and 58% of high-risk subjects. Omnibus analysis of variance test for differences in progression rates was highly significant (p<0.0001). Tukey's post-hoc test showed the low-risk progression rate to be significantly different than both the moderate- and high-risk arms; no difference was noted between the moderate- and high-risk arms themselves. These criteria are a valid tool for classifying TBI patients into two categories of risk for spontaneous progression. This supports tailored chemoprophylaxis regimens for each arm.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app