Executive Functions Following Traumatic Brain Injury in Young Children: A Preliminary Analysis

2004 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 487-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Ewing-Cobbs ◽  
Mary R. Prasad ◽  
Susan H. Landry ◽  
Larry Kramer ◽  
Rosario DeLeon
2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 466-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kalaichelvi Ganesalingam ◽  
Keith Owen Yeates ◽  
H. Gerry Taylor ◽  
Nicolay Chertkoff Walz ◽  
Terry Stancin ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Mirjana Ivanisevic ◽  
Janelle Eloi ◽  
Robert M. Roth ◽  
Fadi M. Tayim ◽  
Laura A. Flashman ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. 529-538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel C. Araujo ◽  
Tanya N. Antonini ◽  
Vicki Anderson ◽  
Kathryn A. Vannatta ◽  
Christina G. Salley ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectives:This study examined whether children with distinct brain disorders show different profiles of strengths and weaknesses in executive functions, and differ from children without brain disorder.Methods:Participants were children with traumatic brain injury (N=82; 8–13 years of age), arterial ischemic stroke (N=36; 6–16 years of age), and brain tumor (N=74; 9–18 years of age), each with a corresponding matched comparison group consisting of children with orthopedic injury (N=61), asthma (N=15), and classmates without medical illness (N=68), respectively. Shifting, inhibition, and working memory were assessed, respectively, using three Test of Everyday Attention: Children’s Version (TEA-Ch) subtests: Creature Counting, Walk-Don’t-Walk, and Code Transmission. Comparison groups did not differ in TEA-Ch performance and were merged into a single control group. Profile analysis was used to examine group differences in TEA-Ch subtest scaled scores after controlling for maternal education and age.Results:As a whole, children with brain disorder performed more poorly than controls on measures of executive function. Relative to controls, the three brain injury groups showed significantly different profiles of executive functions. Importantly, post hoc tests revealed that performance on TEA-Ch subtests differed among the brain disorder groups.Conclusions:Results suggest that different childhood brain disorders result in distinct patterns of executive function deficits that differ from children without brain disorder. Implications for clinical practice and future research are discussed. (JINS, 2017,23, 529–538)


Author(s):  
Christina M. Theodorou ◽  
Miriam A. Nuno ◽  
Kaeli J. Yamashiro ◽  
Sarah C. Stokes ◽  
Jordan E. Jackson ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 104 (7) ◽  
pp. 664-669 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Bressan ◽  
Amit Kochar ◽  
Ed Oakley ◽  
Meredith Borland ◽  
Natalie Phillips ◽  
...  

ObjectiveDespite high-quality paediatric head trauma clinical prediction rules, the management of otherwise asymptomatic young children with scalp haematomas (SH) can be difficult. We determined the risk of intracranial injury when SH is the only predictor variable using definitions from the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) and Children’s Head Injury Algorithm for the Prediction of Important Clinical Events (CHALICE) head trauma rules.DesignPlanned secondary analysis of a multicentre prospective observational study.SettingTen emergency departments in Australia and New Zealand.PatientsChildren <2 years with head trauma (n=5237).InterventionsWe used the PECARN (any non-frontal haematoma) and CHALICE (>5 cm haematoma in any region of the head) rule-based definition of isolated SH in both children <1 year and <2 years.Main outcome measuresClinically important traumatic brain injury (ciTBI; ie, death, neurosurgery, intubation >24 hours or positive CT scan in association with hospitalisation ≥2 nights for traumatic brain injury).ResultsIn children <1 year with isolated SH as per PECARN rule, the risk of ciTBI was 0.0% (0/109; 95% CI 0.0% to 3.3%); in those with isolated SH as defined by the CHALICE, it was 20.0% (7/35; 95% CI 8.4% to 36.9%) with one patient requiring neurosurgery. Results for children <2 years and when using rule specific outcomes were similar.ConclusionsIn young children with SH as an isolated finding after head trauma, use of the definitions of both rules will aid clinicians in determining the level of risk of ciTBI and therefore in deciding whether to do a CT scan.Trial registration numberACTRN12614000463673.


2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 259-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliet Haarbauer-Krupa ◽  
Jennifer P. Lundine ◽  
Roberta DePompei ◽  
Tricia Z. King

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 1061-1068
Author(s):  
Corina Noje ◽  
Eric M. Jackson ◽  
Isam W. Nasr ◽  
Philomena M. Costabile ◽  
Marcelo Cerullo ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document