Should Young Children with Traumatic Brain Injury Be Compared with Community or Orthopedic Control Participants?

Pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) research depends on comparisons of profiles and outcomes between brain-injured individuals and groups consisting either of injured controls (e.g., orthopedic injuries, OI) or uninjured, typically developing children recruited from the community (community controls, CC). Children with OI are thought to provide optimal comparisons for individuals with TBI because they share injury-related experiences and pre-morbid characteristics; however, a study by Mathias and colleagues (2013)1 in adults has called into question the added value of injury control groups in TBI research. The comparability of these control groups has not been established in young children. Seventy-two children with OI and 84 CC aged between 18 and 60 months were compared on a range of demographic variables, developmental and medical history, pre-injury behavioral and adaptive profiles, as well as on measures of adaptive functioning, behavior, family functioning, post-concussive symptoms, and cognition (intellectual functioning, verbal abilities, executive functioning, social cognition) 6 months after the OI. There were no statistically significant differences between the OI and CC groups on any of the variables tested, whether they related to pre-injury or post-injury characteristics. The findings are applicable to studies seeking to identify appropriate control groups in the context of preschool TBI research, and suggest no clear advantage in recruiting OI controls based on the variables studied and the methodology used. However, further work is necessary to verify additional factors and outcomes relevant to pediatric TBI research, as well as to compare outcomes between these two groups at more acute stages (i.e., prior to 6 months post-injury). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]