Wisdom of the caregivers: pooling individual subjective reports to diagnose states of consciousness in brain-injured patients, a monocentric prospective study.
clinical assessment
coma recovery scale - revised
diagnosis
disorders of consciousness
group decision making
minimally conscious state
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 02 2019
21 02 2019
Historique:
entrez:
23
2
2019
pubmed:
23
2
2019
medline:
26
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The clinical distinction between vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) and minimally conscious state (MCS) is a key step to elaborate a prognosis and formulate an appropriate medical plan for any patient suffering from disorders of consciousness (DoC). However, this assessment is often challenging and may require specialised expertise. In this study, we hypothesised that pooling subjective reports of the level of consciousness of a given patient across several nursing staff members can be used to clinically detect MCS. Patients referred to consciousness assessment were prospectively screened. MCS (target condition) was defined according to the best Coma Recovery Scale-Revised score (CRS-R) obtained from expert physicians (reference standard). 'DoC-feeling' score was defined as the median of individual subjective reports pooled from multiple staff members during a week of hospitalisation (index test). Individual ratings were collected at the end of each shift using a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale, blinded from the reference standard. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity metrics. 692 ratings performed by 83 nursing staff members were collected from 47 patients. Twenty patients were diagnosed with UWS and 27 with MCS. DoC-feeling scores obtained by pooling all individual ratings obtained for a given patient were significantly greater in patients with MCS than with UWS (59.2 mm (IQR: 27.3-77.3) vs 7.2 mm (IQR: 2.4-11.4); p<0.001) yielding an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.99). DoC-feeling capitalises on the expertise of nursing staff to evaluate patients' consciousness. Together with the CRS-R as well as with brain imaging, DoC-feeling might improve diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of patients with DoC.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30792234
pii: bmjopen-2018-026211
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026211
pmc: PMC6410088
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e026211Investigateurs
Jérémie Abitbol
(J)
Fatiha Ait Yata Azzi
(FA)
Fatoumata Bah
(F)
Francis Bolgert
(F)
Sandrine Briand
(S)
Sandra Coelho
(S)
Alexia Camuzat
(A)
Jan Claassen
(J)
Marie-Chantal Colmar
(MC)
Flora Cherruault
(F)
Cecile Chordi
(C)
Véronique Cottin
(V)
Bintou Coulibaly
(B)
Mélanie Dalibard
(M)
Athena Demertzi
(A)
Estelle Dumarey
(E)
Bouchra El Aouni
(B)
Atef El Ouarghi
(A)
Denis Engemann
(D)
Helene Espiand
(H)
Cécilia Eltebert
(C)
Fabrice Fanhan
(F)
Agnès Flament
(A)
Marie-Suzelle Fontano
(MS)
Pascale Fournier
(P)
Céline Frammezelle
(C)
Alexandra Grinéa
(A)
Nouara Harchaoui
(N)
Marie Harmancij
(M)
Claire Jacqueminet
(C)
Charlotte Janvier
(C)
Jamila Kebli
(J)
Aurélie Lemoal
(A)
Kim Louis-joseph
(K)
Brice Lucas
(B)
Valérie Maes
(V)
Sophie Maillard
(S)
Romain Maurel
(R)
Madely Petit
(M)
Floriane Pépin
(F)
Pauline Pérez
(P)
Isabelle Picot
(I)
Raphael Porcher
(R)
Eva Proneur
(E)
Federico Raimondo
(F)
Manuela Roselmac
(M)
Sylviane Saintini
(S)
Mélody Seidel
(M)
Johan Stender
(J)
Yolène Sully
(Y)
Kelly Tcha
(K)
Laura Verbaux
(L)
Nicolas Weiss
(N)
Kelly Yanganju
(K)
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Aug 2;113(31):8777-82
pubmed: 27432950
Nat Rev Neurol. 2014 Feb;10(2):99-114
pubmed: 24468878
JAMA Dermatol. 2015 Dec 1;151(12):1346-1353
pubmed: 26501400
BMC Bioinformatics. 2011 Mar 17;12:77
pubmed: 21414208
Neurology. 2002 Feb 12;58(3):349-53
pubmed: 11839831
Ann Neurol. 2005 Oct;58(4):585-93
pubmed: 16178024
Brain Inj. 2018;32(1):72-77
pubmed: 29156989
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Dec;85(12):2020-9
pubmed: 15605342
Neurology. 2018 Sep 4;91(10):450-460
pubmed: 30089618
PLoS One. 2015 Aug 12;10(8):e0134269
pubmed: 26267331
Ann Neurol. 2017 Dec;82(6):866-872
pubmed: 29091304
J Neurol. 2011 Jul;258(7):1373-84
pubmed: 21674197
Ann Neurol. 2017 Jun;81(6):883-889
pubmed: 28543735
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Mar;93(3):428-33.e12
pubmed: 22277244
R Soc Open Sci. 2017 Aug 16;4(8):170193
pubmed: 28878973
Neurology. 2010 Jul 20;75(3):246-52
pubmed: 20554940
Brain. 2018 Apr 1;141(4):949-960
pubmed: 29206895
BMC Neurol. 2009 Jul 21;9:35
pubmed: 19622138
Br J Anaesth. 2018 Jan;120(1):5-9
pubmed: 29397137
Ann Neurol. 2017 Dec;82(6):863-865
pubmed: 29092102
BMJ Open. 2016 Nov 14;6(11):e012799
pubmed: 28137831
JAMA. 2015 Jan 20;313(3):303-4
pubmed: 25603003
J Neurotrauma. 2013 Sep 1;30(17):1476-83
pubmed: 23477301