This paper reports on a funded summit, which convened a multidisciplinary group of experts to provide consensus on the research priorities necessary for improving long-term community integration of individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and their caregivers.

The 2-day summit was directed using the World Café Methodology, to engage stakeholders and collaboratively arrive at a consensus on the problems to be targeted in research. Participants (n=54), drawn from two Canadian provinces, included an interdisciplinary group of researchers, clinicians, representatives from brain injury associations, individuals with TBI, and caregivers. In small groups, participants discussed challenges to long-term community integration and potential initiatives that would address these barriers. Field notes from the discussions were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

The consensus on prioritized research directions included developing interventions to optimize the functioning and participation of individuals with TBI, reducing caregiver burden, and evaluating how emerging technology can facilitate delivery of care.

The World Café Methodology was an effective method for developing research priorities. The breadth of expertise of participants and the collegial environment allowed for the identification of a broad perspective on important future research directions with potential to enhance the long-term community integration of individuals with brain injury.

In the fast pace of the Emergency Department (ED), clinicians are in need of tailored screening tools to detect seniors who are at risk of adverse outcomes. We aimed to explore the usefulness of the Bergman-Paris Question (BPQ) to expose potential undetected geriatric syndromes in community-living seniors presenting to the ED.

This is a planned sub-study of the INDEED multicentre prospective cohort study, including independent or semi-independent seniors (≥65 years old) admitted to hospital after an ED stay ≥8 hours and who were not delirious. Patients were assessed using validated screening tests for 3 geriatric syndromes: cognitive and functional impairment, and frailty. The BPQ was asked upon availability of a relative at enrolment. BPQ’s sensitivity and specificity analyses were used to ascertain outcomes.

A response to the BPQ was available for 171 patients (47% of the main study’s cohort). Of this number, 75.4% were positive (suggesting impairment), and 24.6% were negative. To detect one of the three geriatric syndromes, the BPQ had a sensitivity of 85.4% (95% CI [76.3, 92.0]) and a specificity of 35.4% (95% CI [25.1, 46.7]). Similar results were obtained for each separate outcome. Odds ratio demonstrated a higher risk of presence of geriatric syndromes.

The Bergman-Paris Question could be an ED screening tool for possible geriatric syndrome. A positive BPQ should prompt the need of further investigations and a negative BPQ possibly warrants no further action. More research is needed to validate the usefulness of the BPQ for day-to-day geriatric screening by ED professionals or geriatricians.

The consequences of minor trauma involving a head injury (MT-HI) in independent older adults are largely unknown. This study assessed the impact of a head injury on the functional outcomes six months post-injury in older adults who sustained a minor trauma.

This multicenter prospective cohort study in eight sites included patients who were aged 65 years or older, previously independent, presenting to the emergency department (ED) for a minor trauma, and discharged within 48 hours. To assess the functional decline, we used a validated test: the Older Americans’ Resources and Services Scale. The cognitive function of study patients was also evaluated. Finally, we explored the influence of a concomitant injury on the functional decline in the MT-HI group.

All 926 eligible patients were included in the analyses: 344 MT-HI patients and 582 minor trauma without head injury. After six months, the functional decline was similar in both groups: 10.8% and 11.9%, respectively (RR=0.79 [95% CI: 0.55–1.14]). The proportion of patients with mild cognitive disabilities was also similar: 21.7% and 22.8%, respectively (RR=0.91 [95% CI: 0.71–1.18]). Furthermore, for the group of patients with a MT-HI, the functional outcome was not statistically different with or without the presence of a co-injury (RR=1.35 [95% CI: 0.71–2.59]).

This study did not demonstrate that the occurrence of a MT-HI is associated with a worse functional or cognitive prognosis than other minor injuries without a head injury in an elderly population, six months after injury.

The objective of this study was to explore correlates of cognitive functioning of older adults visiting the emergency department (ED) after a minor injury.

These results are derived from a large prospective study in three Canadian EDs. Participants were aged ≥ 65 years and independent in basic activities of daily living, visiting the ED for minor injuries and discharged home within 48 hours (those with known dementia, confusion, and delirium were excluded). They completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Potential correlates included sociodemographic and injury variables, and measures of psychological and physical health, social support, mobility, falls, and functional status.

Multivariate analyses revealed that male sex, age ≥ 85 years, higher depression scores, slower walking speed, and self-reported memory problems were significantly associated with lower baseline MoCA scores.

These characteristics could help ED professionals identify patients who might need additional cognitive evaluations or follow-ups after their passage through the ED. Obtaining information on these characteristics is potentially feasible in the ED context and could help professionals alter favorably elderly's trajectory of care. Since a significant proportion of elderly patients consulting at an ED have cognitive impairment, the ED is an opportunity to prevent functional and cognitive decline.

Several studies have suggested that cognitive training is a potentially effective way to improve cognition and postpone cognitive decline in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). The MEMO+ study is a randomized, controlled, single-blind trial designed to test the efficacy, specificity, and long-term effect of a cognitive training intervention and a psychosocial intervention in persons with MCI.

One hundred and sixty-two participants with MCI will be recruited. They will be randomized into three groups: cognitive training, psychosocial intervention, and no-contact. Each intervention will last for eight weeks (one session per week) and a booster training session will be provided three months after the end of the intervention. Various proximal and distal outcomes will be measured at pre-intervention as well as at one week, three months, and six months post-training. Proximal outcomes include memory and psychological health measures. Distal outcomes focus on self-rated functioning in complex daily activities and strategies used in daily life to enhance function. Socio-demographic factors (age, gender, and education), general cognition, personality traits, engagement in activities, and self-efficacy will be used as moderators. Enrolment began in April 2012 and will be completed by December 2014.

This study is likely to have a significant impact on the well-being of persons with MCI by contributing to the development of adapted and scientifically supported cognitive and psychosocial interventions.