An interventional study of Clinical implementation strategies in Concussion, Mild and Traumatic Brain Injury, sponsored by Medical College of Wisconsin. Enrolling by invitation at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-30.
Sponsored by Medical College of Wisconsin · Not applicable, Interventional, and Health services research
The purpose of this study is to develop and validate ways to provide better patient education and clinical management for individuals who go to the emergency department (ED) with concussion or mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI).
The study will address three aims: (1) identify factors that help and hinder providing in-ED education to patients with mTBI prior to discharge; (2) examine the impact of tailored implementation strategies on ED providers' provision of in-ED patient education; and (3) evaluate the impact of providing patient education in the ED and through a mobile Health (mHealth) tool post-discharge on patient-level outcomes after mTBI.
637 studies on the registry are indexed under Brain Concussion; 163 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 5,831 is above the median of 63 across 446 interventional studies indexed under Brain Concussion.
Browse Brain Concussion studies →Medical College of Wisconsin is the lead sponsor of 548 studies on the registry; 122 are open to participants now.
Of its 75 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 57 (76%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
ED clinicians:
Patients-Survey Cohort:
Patients-Chart Review Only:
Exclusion Criteria:
ED clinicians:
Patients-Survey Cohort.
Patients-Chart Review Only:
Clinician participants will all have access to any clinical implementation strategies that are developed and disseminated in the project.
Other: Clinical implementation strategies
Patient participants will be observationally followed via survey during the study to monitor patient-reported outcomes.
Patients who are not in the survey study but who meet other eligibility criteria will undergo chart review to provide electronic health record-based outcomes.
Clinical implementation strategies, selected based on ED clinician survey/interview findings from Aim 1 using the Implementing Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) implementation science framework
Change in patient-level penetration-electronic health record (EHR)
Change in the percentage of concussion/mTBI-related encounters for which an mTBI patient handout was documented in the Epic After Visit Summary (Aim 2 outcome)
Time frame: Pre-intervention baseline period (estimated study onset to 1 year later); post- intervention follow-up period (estimated 18 months from study onset to 1 year later)
Change in patient-level penetration-patient reported outcome (PRO)
Change in the percentage of concussion/mTBI-related encounters for which patients reported having received mTBI patient education before ED discharge (Aim 2 outcome)
Time frame: Pre-intervention baseline period (estimated study onset to 1 year later); post- intervention follow-up period (estimated 18 months from study onset to 1 year later)
Self-efficacy to manage mTBI symptoms
Patient ratings on the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Short Form v1.0 - Self-Efficacy for Managing Symptoms, a 20-point scale based on 4 Likert-type items with 5 response options each (higher scores = more confidence) (Aim 3 outcome).
Time frame: Day 1 post-ED visit, Day 30 post-ED visit
mTBI symptom burden
Patient-rated Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire total score (range 0-64; higher scores = more severe injury-related symptoms) (Aim 3 outcome).
Time frame: Day 1 post-ED visit, Day 30 post-ED visit
Change in percentage of trauma cases resulting in mTBI diagnosis
Change in the percentage of ED encounters for a traumatic injury resulting in a diagnosis of concussion or mTBI
Time frame: Pre-intervention baseline period (estimated study onset to 1 year later); post-intervention follow-up period (estimated 18 months from study onset to 1 year later)
Patient-rated mTBI knowledge
Patient-rated mTBI knowledge, measured with a 24-item True/False scale (total score range 0-24; higher scores = greater knowledge). Questions ask about common and uncommon mTBI symptoms and common misconceptions about mTBI signs and recovery.
Time frame: Day 30 post-ED visit
Patient-rated clinical care satisfaction at Day 1
Collected on a 5-point scale with the options Very Satisfied, Somewhat Satisfied, Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied, Somewhat Dissatisfied, and Very Dissatisfied. The question is "How satisfied are you with the care you received for head injury in the Emergency Department?"
Time frame: Day 1 post-ED visit
Patient-rated clinical care satisfaction at Day 30
Collected on a 5-point scale with the options Very Satisfied, Somewhat Satisfied, Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied, Somewhat Dissatisfied, and Very Dissatisfied. The question is "How satisfied are you with the care you received for head injury since leaving the emergency department?"
Time frame: Day 30 post-ED visit
Change in clinician ratings to the Acceptability of Intervention Measure
ED clinician responses to the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), a 4 item scale with 5-point Likert-type items scaled from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). Total scores reflect the mean item rating (range 1 to 5); higher scores reflect greater acceptability. (Aim 2 outcome; Aim 1 will characterize pre-implementation baseline data only)
Time frame: Pre-intervention survey period (study onset through roughly 6 months later); post- intervention survey period (roughly 18 months from study onset to 6 months later)
Change in clinician ratings to the Intervention Appropriateness Measure
ED clinician responses to the Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), a 4 item scale with 5-point Likert-type items scaled from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). Total scores reflect the mean item rating (range 1 to 5); higher scores reflect greater appropriateness. (Aim 2 outcome; Aim 1 will characterize pre-implementation baseline data only)
Time frame: Pre-intervention survey period (study onset through roughly 6 months later); post- intervention survey period (roughly 18 months from study onset to 6 months later)
Change in clinician ratings to the Feasibility of Intervention Measure
ED clinician responses to the Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM), a 4 item scale with 5-point Likert-type items scaled from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). Total scores reflect the mean item rating (range 1 to 5); higher scores reflect greater feasibility. (Aim 2 outcome; Aim 1 will characterize pre-implementation baseline data only)
Time frame: Pre-intervention survey period (study onset through roughly 6 months later); post- intervention survey period (roughly 18 months from study onset to 6 months later)
Plan to share: Yes — De-identified raw data for the Patient-Survey Cohort will be made available on the Open Data Commons for Traumatic Brain Injury (ODC-TBI)
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
No contact was published for this record. The registry link below has the sponsor’s details.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Medical College of Wisconsin →