|Plain Language Summary:
Plain Language Title
Community-based interventions for adolescents following after traumatic shocking, upsetting brain injury: A systematic planned out, orderly, regular review
Review go over, check Question
How effective works well, good, strong are community-based supports for adolescents with traumatic shocking, upsetting brain injury?
Adolescents who suffer from traumatic shocking, upsetting brain injury (TBI) are at a high risk chance of dropping out of school, abusing substances, entering the criminal justice system, and other adverse bad, dangerous, hurtful, harmful outcomes. Community-based rehabilitation programs may help children and adolescents transition back into everyday life after TBI. In this review, community-based interventions include any programs that take place outside of a clinical work, studies, a medical setting that involves patients or school setting. For example, a program might take place in a local youth center or on a computer at home.
The literature search was completed in March 2017. There were no restrictions limitations, changes on the date of publication.
Studies were included if they presented data on young people (ages 11 to 25) who were diagnosed with TBI or concussion. Included studies had to apply use, put on, rub onto, sign up for interventions in a community setting or at home. Studies had to use experimental methods and collect data before and after the intervention. care Qualitative studies and opinion articles were excluded, although quantitative case studies and single-arm designs were eligible to be included. Single-arm designs use only a treatment action, medicine, therapy group without a comparison group.
Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria, covering 11 separate interventions. Included studies were published from 1998 to 2017 and mostly took place in the United States. Seven studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the highest standard of evidence. Two were randomized controlled pilot studies, which may develop create, change, grow into full-scale RCTs. Seven used case study designs, and one used a single-arm design.
Every intervention care included a "neurorehabilitation" approach, which aims to aid recovery by reducing or compensating for any changes in functioning after a brain injury. Interventions involved a variety of components, such as creative arts therapy treatment action, medicine, therapy and computer-based training.
Overall, community-based interventions and supports have the potential to improve outcomes for adolescents following after TBI, but the collective evidence base is weak. Nine studies presented results showing that their community-based interventions had a positive impact for people with TBI. The other eight studies contained some evidence of a positive impact, but their results were not statistically significant. big, serious, important Two specific interventions had strong enough evidence to support their general use as a community-based rehabilitation tool. These are the CAPS and TOPS interventions, which involve web-based problem solving.
Use of Statistics
The review go over, check does not report detailed statistical analysis.
Quality of Evidence
The quality of the evidence was largely weak and varied across studies. About half of the studies used some form of randomization, so those studies tended to be of higher quality. Case studies tended to be of lower quality. Many studies presented inadequate information information, to learn more about the intervention care or limited statistical analysis.