Editorial

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Managing raised intracranial pressure (ICP) with the use of an external ventricular drain (EVD) is a common occurrence in a neurosurgical setting. A central role of the neuroscience nurse in managing that EVD is to monitor the patient for signs and symptoms of infection otherwise known as ventriculitis. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) sampling from an EVD has historically been completed as a daily routine specimen to monitor for any signs of infection. However, in more recent times there has been evidence to suggest that specimens should only be collected when infection or ventriculitis is suspected to minimise the interruption of the closed system. Different practices have been identified related to the frequency of sampling, the best solution for decontamination of the sampling site/port and preferable port for obtaining the specimen. Our aim was to complete an integrative literature review. Medline Complete and CINAHL were searched and articles were screened. Nine articles were used to form the integrated review. The main findings were collated and found that daily sampling is no longer recommended. The proximal port was the most popular choice for sampling. Decontaminating solutions used for accessing an EVD varied with no evidence to support the choice of solution. Findings of the majority of papers were focussed on sampling frequency and other associated ways to minimise infection rather than choice of sampling site or the use of specific decontaminating solutions.</p></abstract>

Yesterday, Today &amp; Tomorrow: Best Practice for CSF Sampling of an EVD to Minimise Patient Risk

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) affects more than 28,000 individuals annually in Thailand; however, little information about outcome after mTBI is known. This investigation aimed to explore consequences of mTBI among Thai adults who experienced mTBI in the previous 3-12 months.</p><p>A sample of 135 adults was interviewed. Subjects were typically men, middle aged and approximately half were married. All completed the compulsory level of education in Thailand and were in the low income bracket. Subjects had Glasgow Coma Scores 14/15 at 30 minutes after injury and 15/15 (full score) after 3 days. Subjects reported low post-concussion symptoms scores and few depressive symptoms. All subjects worked or studied before the injury and almost of them returned to normal lives at the time of interview. However, 18% did experience moderately severe disability and 1.5% suffered severe disabilities.</p><p>Future studies with longitudinal, comparison, or predictive methodology with reduced but relevant variables are suggested. Measures used in this study demonstrated reliability, supporting their use in Thailand. Providing health education and printed information regarding outcomes and disability after mTBI is recommended. Further study of the small but clinically important percentage of subjects who experience ongoing disability after mTBI is needed.</p></abstract>

Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Adapting to Consequences

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>The management of terminal catastrophic haemorrhage is a rare clinical palliative emergency for which the management is based largely on anecdotal and experiential guidelines, with no high grade evidence but rather robust contention and controversy. Whilst often rapid and deadly, inevitably dramatic and devastating for the treating health professionals and family, the key management areas include risk identification, supportive practices, the use of sedative medication and the ethical issues faced in the management of terminal haemorrhage.</p></abstract>

Enquiry into Practice: Management of Terminal Catastrophic Intracranial Haemorrhage in Palliative Care

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><sec id="j_ajon-2017-117_s_001"><h3>Objective</h3><p>To assess the feasibility of service integration for neurological care.</p></sec><sec id="j_ajon-2017-117_s_002"><h3>Design</h3><p>Observation study</p></sec><sec id="j_ajon-2017-117_s_003"><h3>Participants</h3><p>A total of 104 admissions for 92 neurological patients treated in a major region hospital and suitable for discharge home were eligible for participation.</p></sec><sec id="j_ajon-2017-117_s_004"><h3>Intervention</h3><p>A neurological integrated care pathway (NICP) was trialled at a major regional hospital between July 2012 and June 2013. Objective data included patients, gender, age, diagnosis, length of hospital stay, referral dates, discharge dates, dates when patients were seen by the community neurological liaison nurse, and readmissions were collated for analyses.</p></sec><sec id="j_ajon-2017-117_s_005"><h3>Outcome measures</h3><p>Targeted outcomes included the estimated service impact on the hospital in terms of reduced length of hospital stay and decreased readmissions and increased referral rate to community neurological support service, and quality of patient care.</p></sec><sec id="j_ajon-2017-117_s_006"><h3>Results</h3><p>The trial saw an increase in efficiency and standard of care despite growth in patient numbers. The CNLN attended to 104 recorded referrals (more than 17 times the number of referrals in 2011), all within 7 days of their referral date (a 77.4% decrease compared to 2011 where patients were attended to up to 31 days). In addition, the average length of hospital stay had decreased significantly from 26 days in 2011 to 9 days (a 65.4% decrease) with a low rate of re-admission (approximately 11.5%).</p></sec><sec id="j_ajon-2017-117_s_007"><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The NICP improved service efficiency for both the hospital system and the community neurological support service, with high levels of patient satisfaction. In this case the NICP achieved best value from existing resources and provided a viable model of service delivery for chronic neurological conditions.</p></sec></abstract>

A Neurological Integrated Care Pathway

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Despite the high prevalence and associated morbidity of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) development, thromboprophylaxis in the neurosurgical setting remains a source of contention due to concerns of iatrogenic haemorrhage progression associated with anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis. Opinions of ideal time to initiate chemical prophylaxis for VTE within the neurosurgical community vary between clinicians. It is nevertheless rarely disputed that timely and appropriate prophylaxis of VTE reduces morbidity. This review aims to determine the safety and efficacy of chemical VTE prophylaxis within the neurosurgical setting. The consequences of VTE can be devastating and patients with neurotrauma are amongst those at greatest risk. With this in mind, the neuroscience nurse must be meticulously conscientious for the prevention of VTE in the neurosurgical setting. The neurosurgical nurse has a close affiliation to the patient, is often the first to observe the clinical signs and symptoms associated with VTE, is responsible for implementing prevention strategies and assisting with treatment for those who unfortunately develop a Deep Vein Thrombosis or Pulmonary Embolism (PE).</p></abstract>

Timely Anticoagulant Thromboprophylaxis is Safe and Effective in the Care of Patients Suffering Traumatic Brain Injury

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 34 (2024): Issue 1 (May 2024)

Volume 33 (2023): Issue 2 (October 2023)

Volume 33 (2023): Issue 1 (May 2023)

Volume 32 (2022): Issue 2 (October 2022)

Volume 32 (2022): Issue 1 (May 2022)

Volume 31 (2021): Issue 2 (October 2021)

Volume 31 (2021): Issue 1 (May 2021)

Volume 30 (2020): Issue 2 (October 2020)

Volume 30 (2020): Issue 1 (May 2020)

Volume 29 (2019): Issue 2 (May 2019)

Volume 29 (2019): Issue 1 (May 2019)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 2 (November 2018)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 1 (June 2018)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 2 (November 2017)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 1 (November 2017)

Volume 26 (2016): Issue 2 (May 2016)

Volume 26 (2016): Issue 1 (May 2016)

Volume 25 (2015): Issue 2 (October 2015)

Volume 25 (2015): Issue 1 (May 2015)

Australasian Journal of Neuroscience

Australasian Journal of Neuroscience (AJoN) Journal Scope and Aims  Published bi-annually (May and October), the Australasian Journal of Neuroscience (AJoN), the official journal of the Australasian Neuroscience Nurses Association (ANNA), has published original peer reviewed articles since 1988 making it one of the longest standing neuroscience nursing journals.  The AJoN is an international peer reviewed open access journal that aims to promote the development and exchange of knowledge that reflects the broad and emerging interests of neuroscience nursing and the neuroscience nursing profession. The AJoN is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating knowledge and through the promotion of clinically related scholarship, the AJoN supports and advances the practice and discipline of neuroscience nursing.  The mission of the AJoN is to further the neuroscience nursing profession through representation and the provision of works that best represent neuroscience nursing expertise and experience. Through this provision evidence is translated into neuroscience nursing practice to improve health outcomes for individuals, families, and populations.  Fields of nursing represented in the AJoN include, but are not limited to, neurology, movement disorders, neurosurgical, neuro-intensive, neuro-rehabilitative, neuropsychiatry, neuro-gerontology, neuro-paediatric, neuro-emergency and neuro-trauma. Contributions are also welcome from other healthcare fields on issues and developments that have a direct impact on neuroscience nursing practice.  The AJoN welcomes manuscripts from both new and experienced authors wishing to contribute neuroscience knowledge to nursing practice and research. Both National and International submissions are welcome, with the AJoN supporting the exchange of ideas and experience that represents different practices and cultures.  Submitted original articles should make a novel contribution to neuroscience nursing with examples including advances in neurosurgical and neurological nursing, patient care, complex care interventions, research, policy, professional issues, and theory. Submissions must be of a high quality and the journal accepts various article types including (but not limited to) review articles, systematic reports, case series, case studies, quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research articles, practice updates, guest editorials, clinical trials, quality improvement articles, letters to the editor, commentaries, and the development of new guidelines that provide a unique insight into the field of neuroscience nursing. The journal’s purpose is to advance the field of neuroscience nursing by presenting published works with an emphasis on knowledge that will influence the way neuroscience nursing is practiced, taught, researched, and administrated. This information is applicable to nurses working in clinical, administrative, educational,  leadership and research settings. Each issues contains a variety of papers, commentaries and published works resulting from the National ANNA conference. The target audience of the AJoN includes nurses, student nurses, nurse practitioners, managers, executives, administrators, educators, and higher research degree students as well as allied health professionals.  Topics relevant to the AJoN include the development of clinical research and knowledge, evidenced based practice, leadership, and scientific enquiry. Works that explore the patient and family experience, illness, and recovery within the neuroscience field. Organisational factors including governance, patient safety, role development and models of service delivery. As well as cultural comparisons and evaluations of neuroscience nursing practice across different healthcare sectors, social and geographical settings.  The AJoN offers authors the benefits of a highly respected journal in the field of neuroscience nursing, indexed in a wide range of databases including (EBSCO, Elsevier, MIAR, MtScienceWork, ReadCube, SCILIT and Semantic Scholar). The journal has a truly global readership, rapid manuscript screening and efficient editorial processes. The journal also offers a highly visual format, with full colour figures, images, and tables.  The AJoN Editor is advised and supported by a Board of Reviewers that represent all facets of neuroscience nursing. Submitted papers are reviewed by Reviewers who meet a high standard of academic and clinical expertise. The AJoN will ensure that practice and policy development is evidenced based, research is informed at an advanced level and that readers are challenged to engage in critical debate and critically reflect on the interface between practice, policy, and research. The AJoN team believes that every neuroscience nurse should have the opportunity to grow and develop their practice and career through quality education and professional development. The AJoN is essential reading for anyone with an interest in neuroscience nursing.   Archiving  Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy  The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process. 