ABSTRACT
Objective
To examine return to school outcomes 1 year after traumatic brain injury (TBI) rehabilitation discharge.
Design
Longitudinal observational study using Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems National Database (TBIMS-NDB) data at 1-year post-TBI.
Setting
Inpatient rehabilitation centers using follow-up telephone calls.
Individuals
Individuals (n = 237) enrolled in the TBIMS-NDB since 2001 between the ages of 18 and 59 years who were engaged in postsecondary education (full or part-time) before recorded TBI.
Main Measures
Return to school, categorized as in a postsecondary setting at first follow-up (reported hours in school greater than zero at one-year follow-up).
Results
Using an alpha level of 0.05 binary logistic regression analysis identified four predictive variables. Significant predictors of return to school include being of lower age, possessing a higher level of functioning at discharge, reporting lower ratings of disability at discharge, and being able to use a vehicle independently for transportation.
Conclusion
Pursuit of higher education is a viable means of community reintegration after TBI. Some individuals with TBI face a myriad of barriers and challenges when returning to school. Study findings may facilitate understanding of how TBI affects return to school and community reintegration outcomes.
Acknowledgments
(1) The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Rural Health’s Veterans Rural Health Resource Center in Gainesville, Florida. (2) The Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Model Systems (TBIMS) National Database. The TBIMS National Database is a multicenter study of the TBI Model Systems Centers Program, and is supported by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR), a center within the Administration for Community Living (ACL), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). However, these contents do not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the TBI Model Systems Centers, NIDILRR, ACL or HHS.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).