Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-25 @ 4:07 AM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-01-04 @ 8:59 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT00540020
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2007-10-05
First Post:
2007-10-04
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Rehabilitation of Traumatic Brain Injury in Active Duty Military Personnel and Veterans
Sponsor:
The Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Rehabilitation of Traumatic Brain Injury in Active Duty Military Personnel and Veterans: DVBIC Randomized Clinical Trial of Two Rehabilitation Approaches
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2007-10
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Context: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common condition associated with significant long-term cognitive, behavioral, and functional morbidities. There are minimal controlled efficacy data of various acute rehabilitation intervention approaches.
Objective: To determine the relative efficacy of two different acute TBI rehabilitation approaches - cognitive-didactic versus functional-experiential. Secondarily to determine relative efficacy for different patient subpopulations based on baseline cognitive functioning.
Objective: To determine the relative efficacy of two different acute TBI rehabilitation approaches - cognitive-didactic versus functional-experiential. Secondarily to determine relative efficacy for different patient subpopulations based on baseline cognitive functioning.
Detailed Description:
A randomly assigned, intent-to-treat model of two different comprehensive treatment programs conducted between July 19 1996 and May 16, 2003 in 360 adult participants with moderate to severe TBI treated in four participating Veterans Administration TBI rehabilitation centers.
All patients admitted to the Commission for Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF) accredited acute inpatient rehabilitation brain injury programs at 4 participating Veterans Administration Medical Centers (VAMCs) (Minneapolis, Palo Alto, Richmond, and Tampa) during the study enrollment period were screened for eligibility.
The design was a randomized-controlled trial with two treatment arms (cognitive-didactic and functional-experiential), both embedded within an interdisciplinary TBI rehabilitation program. All treatment was hospital based. The interactive nature of the experimental conditions precluded subject blinding. Since each participating site serves a wide geographic area, the protocol permitted post-hospital outcome assessments by structured telephonic interview, to minimize drop out.
Participants completed baseline assessment then received by random assignment one of the two standardized protocol rehabilitation programs (summarized below and described in detail elsewhere). Participants received 1.5 to 2.5 hours daily of protocol-specific therapy plus another 2 to 2.5 hours daily of occupational and physical therapy. Independent teams of therapists functioned at each site to deliver the separate treatments and by necessity were not blinded to treatment. Protocol monitoring site visits, biweekly conference calls, and biannual investigator meetings were conducted to ensure uniformity of protocol treatment over time.
All patients admitted to the Commission for Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF) accredited acute inpatient rehabilitation brain injury programs at 4 participating Veterans Administration Medical Centers (VAMCs) (Minneapolis, Palo Alto, Richmond, and Tampa) during the study enrollment period were screened for eligibility.
The design was a randomized-controlled trial with two treatment arms (cognitive-didactic and functional-experiential), both embedded within an interdisciplinary TBI rehabilitation program. All treatment was hospital based. The interactive nature of the experimental conditions precluded subject blinding. Since each participating site serves a wide geographic area, the protocol permitted post-hospital outcome assessments by structured telephonic interview, to minimize drop out.
Participants completed baseline assessment then received by random assignment one of the two standardized protocol rehabilitation programs (summarized below and described in detail elsewhere). Participants received 1.5 to 2.5 hours daily of protocol-specific therapy plus another 2 to 2.5 hours daily of occupational and physical therapy. Independent teams of therapists functioned at each site to deliver the separate treatments and by necessity were not blinded to treatment. Protocol monitoring site visits, biweekly conference calls, and biannual investigator meetings were conducted to ensure uniformity of protocol treatment over time.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
Is an Unapproved Device?:
Is a PPSD?:
Is a US Export?:
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: