Retrospective observational study explores co-occurrence of TBI and SUD, indicating disparities among rural patients.
Background: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and substance use disorder (SUD) frequently co-occur due to shared risk factors and a potentially bidirectional relationship. However, epidemiological patterns in rural populations remain understudied despite known disparities in access and outcomes. This study aimed to characterize the relationship between TBI and SUD in a rural Southwestern population, including demographic and clinical patterns of diagnostic sequencing. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted using electronic health records and trauma registry data (2022–2023) from a rural trauma center. Cohort one included 24,389 emergency department encounters with ICD-10 codes for TBI or SUD. Cohort two included 248 trauma registry patients with TBI and SUD diagnoses. Descriptive statistics and multinomial logistic regression models were used to evaluate diagnostic patterns and associated demographic factors. Results: Males were more likely to have co-occurring TBI and SUD (Relative Risk Ratio [RRR] = 1.35), while increasing age was associated with TBI-only diagnoses. Among patients with multiple visits and diagnoses, 16% had co-diagnoses, while 9% had sequential diagnoses. American Indian/Alaska Native patients had higher co-diagnosis risk compared to White patients (RRR = 2.21, p < 0.001). Higher blood alcohol concentration was associated with lower Glasgow Coma Scale scores (r = −0.15, p = 0.022), indicating greater severity. Conclusions: TBI and SUD frequently co-occur in rural populations, with notable disparities by sex and race/ethnicity. Emergency Departments are critical points of care for interventions such as screening for both substance use and head injury when either is suspected, and employing culturally responsive education and referral pathways upon discharge.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lininger et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: