Children and young adults in a prolonged unconscious state due to severe brain injury: Outcome after an early intensive neurorehabilitation programme

Brain Injury ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 425-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. J. Eilander ◽  
V. J. M. Wijnen ◽  
J. G. M. Scheirs ◽  
P. L. M. de Kort ◽  
A. J. H. Prevo
Author(s):  
Florian Allonsius ◽  
Arend de Kloet ◽  
Gary Bedell ◽  
Frederike van Markus-Doornbosch ◽  
Stefanie Rosema ◽  
...  

Improving participation is an important aim in outpatient rehabilitation treatment. Knowledge regarding participation restrictions in children and young adults with acquired brain injury (ABI) is scarce and little is known regarding the differences in perspectives between patients and parents in the outpatient rehabilitation setting. The aims are to describe participation restrictions among children/young adults (5–24 years) with ABI and investigating differences between patients’ and parents’ perspectives. At admission in 10 rehabilitation centers, patients and parents were asked to complete the Child and Adolescent Scale of Participation (CASP; score 0–100; lower score = more restrictions) and injury/patient/family-related questions. CASP scores were categorized (full/somewhat-limited/limited/very-limited participation). Patient/parent-reported outcomes were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. 223 patients and 245 parents participated (209 paired-samples). Median patients’ age was 14 years (IQR; 11–16), 135 were female (52%), 195 had traumatic brain injury (75%). The median CASP score reported by patients was 82.5 (IQR: 67.5–90) and by parents 91.3 (IQR: 80.0–97.5) (difference = p < 0.05). The score of 58 patients (26%) and 25 parents (10%) was classified as ‘very-limited’. Twenty-six percent of children and young adults referred for rehabilitation after ABI had “very-limited” participation. Overall, parents rated their child’s participation better than patients themselves. Quantifying participation restrictions after ABI and considering both perspectives is important for outpatient rehabilitation treatment.


The Lancet ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 373 (9669) ◽  
pp. 1105-1110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jakob Christensen ◽  
Marianne G Pedersen ◽  
Carsten B Pedersen ◽  
Per Sidenius ◽  
Jørn Olsen ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Chiara Oprandi ◽  
Alessandra Bardoni ◽  
Luisa Corno ◽  
Agata Marchetti Guerrini ◽  
Luigi Molatore ◽  
...  

This study examined the feasibility and acceptability of a telerehabilitation intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic in a sample of children and young adults with Acquired Brain Injury (ABI). Thirteen patients and/or their families agreed to participate in the speech and neuropsychological telerehabilitation sessions. The treatment was synchronous, patient centered and aimed at improving specific abilities. Sessions were held twice a week over a 10-week period. Two questionnaires were completed both by parents and therapists to assess feasibility and acceptability. Neither technical issues nor clinical obstacles were found. The quality of the therapeutic relationship played a key role in the intervention. Synchronous telerehabilitation provided several advantages both for patients and therapists. Moreover, the patient centered intervention eased the burden of the caregivers at a time of high stress. The real-time telerehabilitation treatments were deemed suitable for children and young adults with ABI. Further studies are needed to support the use of telerehabilitation as an integral part of their standard care.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 311-312
Author(s):  

The American Academy of Pediatrics opposes boxing in any sports program for children and young adults. Amateur boxing is potentially dangerous and yet youngsters are involved in boxing at ages 3 to 4 years. Approximately 15,000 boxers between ages 10 and 15 years are registered with the National Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) Junior Olympics boxing program.1 There may be an even larger number of young boxers in community organizations. Impoverished youths view boxing as a means of financial gain with the potential of providing a new life. Unfortunately, for many, it is a means of improving their physical condition at the risk of slow progressive brain injury, with occasional or no financial rewards. Other sports offer the same conditioning opportunity with minimal or no risk of brain injury. In contrast to professional boxing, amateur boxing is apparently for prestige, recognition, and the enjoyment of winning. Proponents of boxing suggest that it teaches self-defense and discipline, that it builds character and confidence, and that it is relatively safe. Opponents of boxing stress that the principal goal is to render the opponent senseless. Ironically, protective headgear may actually increase brain injuries.2 The degree of physical injury in boxing correlates with the physical strength and activity of the participants; the greatest risks exist when participants are obviously mismatched. The fatality rate in boxing is reported to be low.3 However, the frequency of chronic brain damage is an increasing concern in the medical community.1,4-8 Recent studies4-6 using computed tomography (CT) scanning have revealed brain injury in young boxers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document