Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injury PSP protocol


Published: 05 January 2023

Version: 1

Print this document

Purpose of the PSP and background

The purpose of this protocol is to clearly set out the aims, objectives and commitments of Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injury (TBPI) Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) in line with James Lind Alliance (JLA) principles. The Protocol is a JLA requirement and will be published on the PSP’s page of the JLA website. The Steering Group will review the Protocol regularly and any updated version will be sent to the JLA.

The JLA is a non-profit making initiative, established in 2004. It brings patients, carers and clinicians together in PSPs. These PSPs identify and prioritise the evidence uncertainties, or ‘unanswered questions’, that they agree are the most important for research in their topic area. Traditionally PSPs have focused on uncertainties about the effects of treatments, but some PSPs have chosen to broaden their scope beyond that. The aim of a PSP is to help ensure that those who fund health research are aware of what really matters to patients, carers and clinicians. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR – coordinates the infrastructure of the JLA to oversee the processes for PSPs, based at the NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre (NETSCC), University of Southampton.

Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injuries (TBPI) are life changing and can lead to permanent changes in function of the arm and hand. The severity of symptoms can vary greatly from person to person, and between different affected nerves and joints. Symptoms can be short-term, lasting a few months, whereas others can experience continuous and severe problems for the rest of their lives. Symptoms can include pain, numbness, stiffness, muscle weakness and reduced movement in the arm and hand. The host centre for this PSP is a specialist centre for the treatment of TBPI. The PSP leads are both clinical academics and passionate about improving patient care through sound and effect research. This TBPI PSP has enabled the formation of a multi-disciplined steering group of individual who have experience of these life changing injuries either from a personal or professional perspective.

Aims, objectives and scope of the PSP

The aim of the TBPI PSP is to identify the unanswered questions about traumatic brachial plexus injuries from patient, carer and clinical perspectives and then prioritise those that patients, carers and clinicians agree are the most important for research to address.

The objectives of the PSP are to:

  • work with patients, carers and clinicians to identify uncertainties about assessment (examination/outcomes), diagnosis (imaging/test), treatment (pharmacology/cellular/tissues/conservative/operative/rehabilitation) and the care and support for patients and families who have suffered a TBPI.
  • to agree by consensus a prioritised list of those uncertainties, for research
  • to publicise the results of the PSP and process
  • to take the results to research commissioning bodies to be considered for funding.

The scope of the TBPI PSP is defined as including the following:

  • Assessment (e.g. injury severity/anatomic involvement/co-morbidities/clinician reported measures/patient reported outcomes – psychological/QoL aspects)
  • Diagnosis (injury severity/natural history/imaging/neurophysiology/biomarkers)
  • Treatment (e.g. psychological therapies/medical management/physical therapies/surgical management/assistive technologies)
  • Care and support (e.g. long term support for patients/prevention of future complications/access to services and social support).

The PSP will exclude from its scope questions about:

  • Epidemiology/prevention
  • Causation/mechanism of injury
  • Birth brachial plexus injuries
  • Injuries sustained due to radiotherapy
  • Complementary therapies (e.g. aromatherapy, reflexology, homeopathy)
  • Societal/Health economic impacts of TBPI
  • Medicolegal implications

The Steering Group is responsible for discussing what implications the scope of the PSP will have for the evidence-checking stage of the process. Resources and expertise will be put in place to do this evidence checking.

The Steering Group

The Steering Group includes membership of patients and carers and clinicians , as individuals or representatives from a relevant group.

The TBPI PSP will be led and managed by a Steering Group involving the following:

Patient and carer representative/s:

  • Neil Finney (Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injury Group representative)
  • Steve Bloyce (patient)
  • Louis James (patient)
  • Phill Burke (patient)
  • Ken De Zoyza (patient)
  • Jude Roberts (patient)

Clinical representative/s:

  • Kate Kennard, Occupational Therapist, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital.
  • Caroline Miller, Physiotherapist, Queen Elizabeth II Hospital.
  • Grainne Bourke, Plastic Surgeon, Leeds General Infirmary.
  • Dennis Hazell, Nurse Specialist, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital.
  • Suzanne Oxhey, Physiotherapist, Leeds General Infirmary.
  • Mandy Sinforiani, Occupational Therapist, New Victoria Hospital.
  • Paul Malone, Plastic Surgeon, Queen Elizabeth II Hospital.
  • Tim Hems, Orthopaedic Surgeon, New Victoria Hospital.
  • Gail Morrison, Orthotist, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.
  • Tom Quick, Orthopaedic Surgeon, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital.
  • Hazel Brown, Physiotherapist, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital.

Project coordinator:

Hazel Brown, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital and Centre for Nerve Engineering, UCL.

James Lind Alliance Adviser and Chair of the Steering Group:

Katherine Cowan, James Lind Alliance.

The Steering Group will agree the resources, including time and expertise that they will be able to contribute to each stage of the process, with input and advice from the JLA.


Organisations and individuals will be invited to be involved with the PSP as partners. Partners are organisations or groups who will commit to supporting the PSP, promoting the process and encouraging their represented groups or members to participate. Organisations which can reach and advocate for these groups will be invited to become involved in the PSP. Partners represent the following groups:

  • people who have had TBPI
  • carers of people who have had TBPI
  • health and social care professional groups - with members who have experience of treating TBPI.
  • Charity support groups who are associated with TBPI patients
  • Groups that advocate for the care of TBPI

Exclusion criteria

Some organisations may be judged by the JLA or the Steering Group to have conflicts of interest. These may be perceived to potentially cause unacceptable bias as a member of the Steering Group. As this is likely to affect the ultimate findings of the PSP, those organisations will not be invited to participate. It is possible, however, that interested parties may participate in a purely observational capacity when the Steering Group considers it may be helpful.

The methods the PSP will use

This section describes a schedule of proposed steps through which the PSP aims to meet its objectives. The process is iterative and dependent on the active participation and contribution of different groups. The methods used in any step will be agreed through consultation between the Steering Group members, guided by the PSP’s aims and objectives. More details of the method are in the Guidebook section of the JLA website at where examples of the work of other JLA PSPs can be seen.

Step 1: Identification and invitation of potential partners

Potential partner organisations will be identified through a process of peer knowledge and consultation, through the Steering Group members’ networks. Potential partners will be contacted and informed of the establishment and aims of the TBPI PSP.

  • Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injury Group
  • Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital charity
  • Leeds Hospital Charity
  • Enable
  • Enable Scotland
  • Veterans groups
  • National Association for Bikers with a Disability (NABD)
  • Bush & Co Rehab limited
  • 3Drehab

  • Chartered Society of Physiotherapy (CSP)
  • Royal College of Occupational Therapists (RCOT)
  • British Society for Surgery of the Hand (BSSH)
  • British Association of Hand Therapists (BAHT)
  • Association of Trauma and Orthopaedic Chartered Physiotherapists (ATOCP)
  • British Orthopaedic Association (BOA)
  • British Association of Prosthetists and Orthotists (BAPO)
  • British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS)
  • Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA)
  • British Elbow and Shoulder Society (BESS)
  • Royal College Emergency Medicine (RCEM)

  • Irwin Mitchell
  • Slater Gordon
  • Plexus Law
  • Brown Jacobson
  • DAC Beachcroft
  • Stewarts Law
  • Horwich Cohen Coghlan Solicitors

Step 2: Awareness raising

PSPs will need to raise awareness of their proposed activity among their patient, carer and clinician communities, in order to secure support and participation. Depending on budget, this may be done by a face-to-face meeting, or there may be other ways in which the process can be launched, e.g. via social media. It may be carried out as part of steps 1 and/or 3. The Steering Group should advise on when to do this. Awareness raising has several key objectives:

  • to present the proposed plan for the PSP
  • to generate support for the process
  • to encourage participation in the process
  • to initiate discussion, answer questions and address concerns.

Step 3: Identifying evidence uncertainties

The TBPI PSP will carry out a consultation to gather uncertainties from patients, carers and clinicians. A period of 3 months will be given to complete this exercise (which may be revised by the Steering Group if required).

The TBPI PSP recognises that the following groups may require additional consideration:

  • Individuals from deprived or under-represented communities.
  • Those with pre-existing or concurrent cognitive or physical disabilities.
  • People who have been imprisoned.
  • Military personnel and their families.

The Steering Group will use the following methods to reach the target groups

  • Link to online survey on JLA TBPI social media accounts (twitter/facebook/Instagram)
  • Link to online survey on JLA TBPI website
  • Representatives from each regional centre within the steering group to disseminate information within their clinical environment and forums.
  • Online and paper resources available
  • Face to face, online and telephone availability
  • Formation of a system of champions from minority communities to advise and recommend relevant platforms of communication
  • Involvement of charitable organisations within steering group and partners
  • Link to online survey/ telephone and paper options hosted on TBPI charity website
  • Link to online survey/ telephone and paper options distributed on TBPI UK online forum
  • Link to online survey / telephone and paper options promoted on the TBPI UK Facebook site
  • Link to online survey / telephone and paper options promoted on TBPI UK twitter

Existing sources of evidence uncertainties may also be searched.

Step 4: Refining questions and uncertainties

The consultation process will produce ‘raw’ questions and comments indicating patients’, carers’ and clinicians’ areas of uncertainty. These raw questions will be categorised and refined by Matt Wilcox, Hazel Brown and Tom Quick into summary questions which are clear, addressable by research, and understandable to all. Similar or duplicate questions will be combined where appropriate. Out-of-scope and ‘answered’ submissions will be compiled separately. The Steering Group will have oversight of this process to ensure that the raw data is being interpreted appropriately and that the summary questions are being worded in a way that is understandable to all audiences. The JLA Adviser will observe to ensure accountability and transparency.

This will result in a long list of in-scope summary questions. These are not research questions and to try and word them as such may make them too technical for a non-research audience. They will be framed as researchable questions that capture the themes and topics that people have suggested.

The summary questions will then be checked against evidence to determine whether they have already been answered by research. This will be done by Matt Wilcox, Hazel Brown and Tom Quick. The PSP will complete the JLA Question Verification Form, which clearly describes the process used to verify the uncertainty of the questions, before starting prioritisation. The Question Verification Form includes details of the types and sources of evidence used to check uncertainty. The Question Verification Form should be published on the JLA website as soon as it has been agreed to enable researchers and other stakeholders to understand how the PSP has decided that its questions are unanswered, and any limitations of this.

Questions that are not adequately addressed by previous research will be collated and recorded on a standard JLA template by Matthew Wilcox and Hazel Brown. This will show the checking undertaken to make sure that the uncertainties have not already been answered. The data should be submitted to the JLA for publication on its website on completion of the priority setting exercise, taking into account any changes made at the final workshop, in order to ensure that PSP results are publicly available.

The Steering Group will also consider how it will deal with submitted questions that have been answered, and questions that are out of scope.

Step 5: Prioritisation – interim and final stages

The aim of the final stage of the priority setting process is to prioritise through consensus the identified uncertainties about TBPI . This will involve input from patients, carers and clinicians. The JLA encourages PSPs to involve as wide a range of people as possible, including those who did and did not contribute to the first consultation. There are usually two stages of prioritisation.

  1. Interim prioritisation is the stage where the long list of questions is reduced to a shorter list that can be taken to the final priority setting workshop. This is aimed at a wide audience, and is done using similar methods to the first consultation. With the JLA’s guidance, the Steering Group will agree the method and consider how best to reach and engage patients, carers and clinicians in the process. The most highly ranked questions (around 25) will be taken to a final priority setting workshop. Where the interim prioritisation does not produce a clear ranking or cut off point, the Steering Group will decide which questions are taken forwards to the final prioritisation.

  2. The final priority setting stage is generally a one-day workshop facilitated by the JLA. With guidance from the JLA and input from the Steering Group, up to 30 patients, carers and clinicians will be recruited to participate in a day of discussion and ranking, to determine the top 10 questions for research. All participants will declare their interests. The Steering Group will advise on any adaptations needed to ensure that the process is inclusive and accessible.

Dissemination of results

The Steering Group will identify audiences with which it wants to engage when disseminating the results of the priority setting process, such as researchers, funders and the patient and clinical communities. They will need to determine how best to communicate the results and who will take responsibility for this. Previous PSPs’ outputs have included academic papers, lay reports, infographics, conference presentations and videos for social media.

It should be noted that the priorities are not worded as research questions. The Steering Group should discuss how they will work with researchers and funders to establish how to address the priorities and to work out what the research questions are that will address the issues that people have prioritised. The dissemination of the results of the PSP will be led by Matt Wilcox, Hazel Brown and Tom Quick.

The JLA encourages PSPs to report back about any activities that have come about because of the PSP, including funded research. Please send any details to

Agreement of the Steering Group

The TBPIPSP Steering Group agreed the content and direction of this Protocol on 16/12/22.