Early mobilisation by head-up tilt with stepping versus standard care after severe traumatic brain injury - Protocol for a randomised clinical feasibility trial

Christian Gunge Riberholt, Jane Lindschou, Christian Gluud, Jesper Mehlsen, Kirsten Møller, Christian Gunge Riberholt, Jane Lindschou, Christian Gluud, Jesper Mehlsen, Kirsten Møller

Abstract

Background: Intensive rehabilitation of patients with severe traumatic brain injury is generally applied in the subacute stages of the hospital stay. Few studies have assessed the association between early and intensive physical rehabilitation and functional outcomes. The aim of this trial is to assess the feasibility of an intensive physical rehabilitation intervention focusing on mobilisation to the upright position, starting as early as clinically possible versus standard care in the intensive care unit. The feasibility study is intended to inform a subsequent randomised clinical trial that will investigate benefits and harms of the intervention.

Methods: This randomised clinical feasibility trial with a follow-up period of 1 year will use blinded outcome assessors for the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised. A maximum of 60 patients admitted to the neurointensive care unit at Rigshospitalet, Denmark, with traumatic brain injury (age of at least 18 years), a low level of consciousness, and stable intracranial pressure will be included in the trial. Patients will be randomly assigned to experimental intervention versus standard care (1:1) stratified according to their Glasgow Coma Score. The intervention group will receive daily mobilisation in a tilt table with an integrated stepping device (ERIGO®). Feasibility is declared if more than 60% (the lower 95% confidence interval of the proportion) of eligible patients are included in the trial and more than 52% (the lower 95% confidence interval of the proportion) of patients in the intervention group receive more than 60% of the planned interventions. Safety is assessed by the occurrence of adverse events and adverse reactions. Exploratory clinical outcomes consist of cerebral haemodynamics (blood flow velocity and pressure autoregulation) and baroreceptor sensitivity in the early phase as well as functional outcomes (Coma Recovery Scale-Revised, Early Functional Ability scale, and Functional Independence Measure).

Discussion: Our findings will inform a future, larger-scale randomised clinical trial on early mobilisation using a tilt table early after severe traumatic brain injury.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02924649 . Registered on 3 October 2016.

Keywords: Brain injury; Cerebral autoregulation of blood flow; Randomised feasibility trial; Rehabilitation; Tilt-table therapy.

Conflict of interest statement

Authors’ information

CGR is a physical therapist and PhD student at the University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, and is employed at the department of neurorehabilitation/TBI unit in the Research Unit on BRain Injury Copenhagen (RUBRIC). JM is a medical doctor at the Syncope Centre, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, Nordre Fasanvej 57, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark. JL is a clinical research consultant, MSc, at the Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Dept. 7812, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. CG is a medical doctor, consultant, and head of department, DMSc, at the Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. KM is a medical doctor, consultant, and professor at the Department of Neuroanaesthesiology, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 København Ø, Denmark.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This trial has been approved by the Scientific-Ethics Committee of the Capital Region (H-16041794) and is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02924649). After a patient is found to be eligible for the trial, informed consent from the proxy and a trial guardian (a physician not involved in the trial) is obtained by CGR. CGR is the project manager and is responsible for collecting and storing data and all correspondence.

The trial is carried out in accordance with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration. The project manager is responsible for informing the Scientific-Ethics Committee of the Capital Region in Denmark of any critical adverse event or major changes of the protocol or both. All correspondence will be filed by the project manager.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) table of enrollment, intervention, and assessments
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Trial flow diagram. Abbreviations: GCS Glasgow Coma Scale, ICP intracranial pressure

References

    1. Horn SD, DeJong G, Smout RJ, Gassaway J, James R, Conroy B. Stroke rehabilitation patients, practice, and outcomes: is earlier and more aggressive therapy better? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(12 Suppl 2):S101–SS14. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.09.016.
    1. DeJong G, Hsieh CH, Putman K, Smout RJ, Horn SD, Tian W. Physical therapy activities in stroke, knee arthroplasty, and traumatic brain injury rehabilitation: their variation, similarities, and association with functional outcomes. Phys Ther. 2011;91:1826–1837. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20100424.
    1. Riberholt CG, Thorlund JB, Mehlsen J, Nordenbo AM. Patients with severe acquired brain injury show increased arousal in tilt-table training. Dan Med J. 2013;60:A4739.
    1. Wilson B, Dhamapurkar S, Tunnard C, Watson P, Florschutz G. The effect of positioning on the level of arousal and awareness in patients in the vegetative state or the minimally conscious state: A replication and extension of a previous finding. Brain Impairment. 2013;14:475–479. doi: 10.1017/BrImp.2013.34.
    1. Elliott L, Coleman M, Shiel A, Wilson B, Badwan D, Menon D, et al. Effect of posture on levels of arousal and awareness in vegetative and minimally conscious state patients: a preliminary investigation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005;76:298–299. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2004.047357.
    1. Newman M, Barker K. The effect of supported standing in adults with upper motor neurone disorders: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil. 2012;26:1059–1077. doi: 10.1177/0269215512443373.
    1. Chang AT, Boots RJ, Hodges PW, Thomas PJ, Paratz JD. Standing with the assistance of a tilt table improves minute ventilation in chronic critically ill patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:1972–1976. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.03.024.
    1. Riberholt CG, Olesen ND, Thing M, Juhl CB, Mehlsen J, Petersen TH. Impaired cerebral autoregulation during head up tilt in patients with severe brain injury. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0154831. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154831.
    1. Gajek J, Zysko D, Krzeminska S, Mazurek W. The influence of a tilt training programme on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system activity in patients with vasovagal syncope. Acta Cardiol. 2009;64:505–509. doi: 10.2143/AC.64.4.2041616.
    1. Verheyden B, Ector H, Aubert AE, Reybrouck T. Tilt training increases the vasoconstrictor reserve in patients with neurally mediated syncope evoked by head-up tilt testing. Eur Heart J. 2008;29:1523–1530. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn134.
    1. Lang EW, Lagopoulos J, Griffith J, Yip K, Mudaliar Y, Mehdorn HM, et al. Noninvasive cerebrovascular autoregulation assessment in traumatic brain injury: validation and utility. J Neurotrauma. 2003;20:69–75. doi: 10.1089/08977150360517191.
    1. Liu X, Czosnyka M, Donnelly J, Budohoski KP, Varsos GV, Nasr N, et al. Comparison of frequency and time domain methods of assessment of cerebral autoregulation in traumatic brain injury. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2015;35:248–256. doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2014.192.
    1. Andelic N, Bautz-Holter E, Ronning P, Olafsen K, Sigurdardottir S, Schanke AK, et al. Does an early onset and continuous chain of rehabilitation improve the long-term functional outcome of patients with severe traumatic brain injury? J Neurotrauma. 2012;29:66–74. doi: 10.1089/neu.2011.1811.
    1. Berney SC, Rose JW, Bernhardt J, Denehy L. Prospective observation of physical activity in critically ill patients who were intubated for more than 48 hours. J Crit Care. 2015;30:658–663. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.03.006.
    1. Frazzitta G, Valsecchi R, Zivi I, Sebastianelli L, Bonini S, Zarucchi A, et al. Safety and feasibility of a very early verticalization in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2015;30:290–292. doi: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000135.
    1. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, Laupacis A, Gotzsche PC, Krleza-Jeric K, et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:200–207. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-3-201302050-00583.
    1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c332. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c332.
    1. Marmarou A, Lu J, Butcher I, McHugh GS, Murray GD, Steyerberg EW, et al. Prognostic value of the Glasgow Coma Scale and pupil reactivity in traumatic brain injury assessed pre-hospital and on enrollment: an IMPACT analysis. J Neurotrauma. 2007;24:270–280. doi: 10.1089/neu.2006.0029.
    1. Jarvinen TL, Sihvonen R, Bhandari M, Sprague S, Malmivaara A, Paavola M, et al. Blinded interpretation of study results can feasibly and effectively diminish interpretation bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67:769–772. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.11.011.
    1. Giacino JT, Kalmar K, Whyte J. The JFK Coma Recovery Scale-Revised: measurement characteristics and diagnostic utility. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:2020–2029. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.02.033.
    1. Hankemeier A, Rollnik JD. The Early Functional Abilities (EFA) scale to assess neurological and neurosurgical early rehabilitation patients. BMC Neurol. 2015;15:207. doi: 10.1186/s12883-015-0469-z.
    1. van Baalen B, Odding E, van Woensel MP, Roebroeck ME. Reliability and sensitivity to change of measurement instruments used in a traumatic brain injury population. Clin Rehabil. 2006;20:686–700. doi: 10.1191/0269215506cre982oa.
    1. Beninato M, Gill-Body KM, Salles S, Stark PC, Black-Schaffer RM, Stein J. Determination of the minimal clinically important difference in the FIM instrument in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:32–39. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.08.130.
    1. Donaghy S, Wass PJ. Interrater reliability of the Functional Assessment Measure in a brain injury rehabilitation program. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79:1231–1236. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(98)90267-2.
    1. Stubbs PW, Pallesen H, Pedersen AR, Nielsen JF. Using EFA and FIM rating scales could provide a more complete assessment of patients with acquired brain injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2014;36:2278–2281. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2014.904935.
    1. Gronwall D, Wrightson P. Duration of post-traumatic amnesia after mild head injury. J Clin Neuropsychol. 1980;2:51–60. doi: 10.1080/01688638008403780.
    1. Czosnyka M, Smielewski P, Kirkpatrick P, Menon DK, Pickard JD. Monitoring of cerebral autoregulation in head-injured patients. Stroke. 1996;27:1829–1834. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.27.10.1829.
    1. van de Vooren H, Gademan MG, Swenne CA, TenVoorde BJ, Schalij MJ, Van der Wall EE. Baroreflex sensitivity, blood pressure buffering, and resonance: what are the links? Computer simulation of healthy subjects and heart failure patients. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2007;102:1348–1356. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00158.2006.
    1. Jakobsen JC, Gluud C, Wetterslev J, Winkel P. When and how should multiple imputation be used for handling missing data in randomised clinical trials - a practical guide with flowcharts. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17:162. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0442-1.
    1. Frazzitta G, Zivi I, Valsecchi R, Bonini S, Maffia S, Molatore K, et al. Effectiveness of a Very Early Stepping Verticalization Protocol in Severe Acquired Brain Injured Patients: A Randomized Pilot Study in ICU. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0158030. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158030.
    1. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, Schulz KF, Juni P, Altman DG, et al. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ. 2008;336:601–605. doi: 10.1136/.
    1. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135:982–989. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-135-11-200112040-00010.
    1. Savovic J, Jones HE, Altman DG, Harris RJ, Juni P, Pildal J, et al. Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157:429–438. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-6-201209180-00537.
    1. Wetterslev J, Jakobsen JC, Gluud C. Trial Sequential Analysis in systematic reviews with meta-analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17:39. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0315-7.
    1. Nguyen TL, Collins GS, Lamy A, Devereaux PJ, Daures JP, Landais P, et al. Simple randomization did not protect against bias in smaller trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;84:105–113. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.02.010.

Source: PubMed

3
購読する