Abstract
The burden of disease and so the need for care is often greater at hospitals in emerging economies. This is compounded by frequent restrictions in the delivery of good quality clinical care due to resource limitations. However, there is substantial heterogeneity in this economically defined group, such that advanced brain monitoring is routinely practiced at certain centers that have an interest in neurocritical care. It also must be recognized that significant heterogeneity in the delivery of neurocritical care exists even within individual high-income countries (HICs), determined by costs and level of interest. Direct comparisons of data between HICs and the group of low- and middle-income countries (LAMICs) are made difficult by differences in patient demographics, selection for ICU admission, therapies administered, and outcome assessment. Evidence suggests that potential benefits of multimodality monitoring depend on an appropriate environment and clinical expertise. There is no evidence to suggest that patients in LAMICs where such resources exist should be treated any differently to patients from HICs. The potential for outcome benefits in LAMICs is arguably greater in absolute terms because of the large burden of disease; however, the relative cost/benefit ratio of such monitoring in this setting must be viewed in context of the overall priorities in delivering health care at individual institutions.
