Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Oct;39(19-20):1289-1317.
doi: 10.1089/neu.2022.0138.

Remote Follow-Up Technologies in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Scoping Review

Brandon G Smith  1   2 , Stasa Tumpa  3 , Orla Mantle  4 , Charlotte J Whiffin  2   5 , Harry Mee  1   6 , Davi J Fontoura Solla  2   7 , Wellingson S Paiva  2   7 , Virginia F J Newcombe  8 , Angelos G Kolias  1   2 , Peter J Hutchinson  1   2
Affiliations

Remote Follow-Up Technologies in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Scoping Review

Brandon G Smith et al. J Neurotrauma. 2022 Oct.

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Motivations for outcome data collection in TBI are threefold: to improve patient outcomes, to facilitate research, and to provide the means and methods for wider injury surveillance. Such data play a pivotal role in population health, and ways to increase the reliability of data collection following TBI should be pursued. As a result, technology-aided follow-up of patients with neurotrauma is on the rise; there is, therefore, a need to describe how such technologies have been used. A scoping review was conducted and reported using the PRISMA extension (PRISMA-ScR). Five electronic databases (Embase, MEDLINE, Global Health, PsycInfo, and Scopus) were searched systematically using keywords derived from the concepts of "telemedicine," "TBI," "outcome assessment," and "patient-generated health data." Forty studies described follow-up technologies (FUTs) utilizing telephones (52.5%, n = 21), short message service (SMS; 10%, n = 4), smartphones (22.5%, n = 9), videoconferencing (10%, n = 4), digital assistants (2.5%, n = 1), and custom devices (2.5%, n = 1) among cohorts of patients with TBI of varying injury severity. Where reported, clinical facilitators, remote follow-up timing and intervals between sessions, synchronicity of follow-up instances, proxy involvement, outcome measures utilized, and technology evaluation efforts are described. FUTs can aid more temporally sensitive assessments and capture fluctuating sequelae, a benefit of particular relevance to TBI cohorts. However, the evidence base surrounding FUTs remains in its infancy, particularly with respect to large samples, low- and middle-income patient cohorts, and the validation of outcome measures for deployment via such remote technology.

Keywords: follow-up technology; innovation; outcome assessment; patient-generated health data; telemedicine; traumatic brain injury.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

AGK and PJH are supported by the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Center, the NIHR Brain Injury MedTech Co-Operative, and the NIHR Global Health Research Group on Neurotrauma. BGS and CJW are supported by the NIHR Global Health Research Group on Neurotrauma. PJH is also supported by an NIHR Research Professorship, and by the Royal College of Surgeons of England. The NIHR Global Health Research Group on Neurotrauma was commissioned by the U.K. NIHR using Official Development Assistance funding (project no. 16/137/105). VFJN is funded by an Academy of Medical Sciences/The Health Foundation Clinician Scientist Fellowship.

Figures

FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flowchart detailing the study selection process.
FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.
Follow-up technology modality over time. PDA, personal digital assistant; SMS, short message service.
FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.
Intervals between remote follow-up sessions with respect to follow-up technology modality. SMS, short message service.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Dewan MC, Rattani A, Gupta S, et al. Estimating the global incidence of traumatic brain injury. J Neurosurg 2019;130(4):1080–1097; doi: 10.3171/2017.10.JNS17352. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hyder AA, Wunderlich CA, Puvanachandra P, et al. The impact of traumatic brain injuries: a global perspective. NeuroRehabilitation 2007;22(5):341–353; doi: 10.3233/NRE-2007-22502. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Langlois JA, Rutland-Brown W, Wald MM. The epidemiology and impact of traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2006;21(5):375–378; doi: 10.1097/00001199-200609000-00001. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bryant RA, O'Donnell ML, Creamer M, et al. The psychiatric sequelae of traumatic injury. Am J Psychiatry 2010;167(3):312–320; doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2009.09050617. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Maas AIR, Menon DK, Adelson PD, et al. Traumatic brain injury: integrated approaches to improve prevention, clinical care, and research. Lancet Neurol 2017;16(12):987–1048; doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30371-X. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources