Article Text

Download PDFPDF

P2.004 A scoping review on strategies and interventions in global neurotrauma prevention
  1. Santhani M Selveindran1,2,
  2. Peter Hutchinson1,2,
  3. Tamara Tango3,
  4. Muhammad Mukhtar Khan2,4,
  5. Daniel Simadibrata2,4,
  6. Carol Brayne2,5,
  7. Christine Hill2,5,
  8. Angelos Kolias1,2,
  9. Franco Servadei2,6,
  10. Alexis Joannides1,2,
  11. Andres Rubiano2,7,
  12. Hamisi Shabani2,8
  1. 1Cambridge University Hospitals Trust, Cambridge, UK
  2. 2NIHR Global Health Research Group on Neurotrauma, Cambridge, UK
  3. 3Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
  4. 4Northwest School of Medicine and Gernal Hospital and Research Centre, Peshawar, Pakistan
  5. 5Cambridge Institute of Public Health, Cambridge, UK
  6. 6Humanitas University and Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
  7. 7Neuroscience Institute El Bosque University, Bogota, Colombia
  8. 8Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute and Muhimbili University College of Allied Health Sciences, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania


Background Neurotrauma from road traffic collisions (RTCs) is an important yet preventable cause of death and disability especially in low and middle income countries (LMICs). However, it is uncertain if current preventative strategies are applicable globally due to variations in environment, resources, population, culture and infrastructure. This scoping review aims to identify, quantify and describe the evidence on approaches in neurotrauma and RTCs prevention, and ascertain contextual factors that influence their implementation in LMICs and high income countries (HICs).

Methods A systematic search was conducted using five electronic databases, grey literature databases, and bibliographic and citation searching of selected articles. The extracted data were presented using figures, tables, and accompanying narrative summaries.

Results A total of 411 publications met the inclusion criteria. Only 65 papers came from LMICs, which mostly described primary prevention, focussing on road safety. For the reviews, 41 papers (66.1%) reviewed primary, 18 tertiary (29.1%), and three secondary preventative approaches. Most of the primary papers in the reviews came from HICs (67.7%) with 5 reviews on only LMIC papers. Fifteen reviews (24.1%) included papers from both HICs and LMICs. Contextual factors were described in 62 papers, and varied depending on the interventions.

Conclusions There is a large quantity of global evidence on strategies and interventions for neurotrauma and RTCs prevention. However, less papers were from LMICs, especially on secondary and tertiary prevention. More primary research needs to be done in these countries to determine what strategies and interventions exist, and the applicability of HIC interventions in LMICs.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.