Comparing indices of responsiveness for the Coma Near-Coma Scale with and without pain items: An Exploratory study.
brain injuries
consciousness disorders
pain
rehabilitation
Journal
Brain and behavior
ISSN: 2162-3279
Titre abrégé: Brain Behav
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101570837
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2023
08 2023
Historique:
revised:
25
05
2023
received:
27
01
2023
accepted:
31
05
2023
medline:
28
8
2023
pubmed:
12
6
2023
entrez:
12
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study aimed to establish the indices of responsiveness for the Coma/Near-Coma (CNC) scale without (8 items) and with (10 items) pain test stimuli. A secondary purpose was to examine whether the CNC 8 items and 10 items differ when detecting change in neurobehavioral function. We analyzed CNC data from three studies of participants with disorders of consciousness: one observational study and two intervention studies. We generated Rasch person measures using the CNC 8 items and CNC 10 items for each participant at two time points 14 ± 2 days apart using Rasch Measurement Theory. We calculated the distribution-based minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and minimal detectable change using 95% confidence intervals (MDC We used the Rasch transformed equal-interval scale person measures in logits. For the CNC 8 items: Distribution-based MCID 0.33 SD = 0.41 logits and MDC Our preliminary evidence supports the clinical and research utility of the CNC 8-item scale for measuring the responsiveness of neurobehavioral function, and that it demonstrates comparable responsiveness to the CNC 10-item scale without administering the two pain items. The distribution-based MCID can be used to evaluate group-level changes while the MDC
Identifiants
pubmed: 37303294
doi: 10.1002/brb3.3120
pmc: PMC10454260
doi:
Types de publication
Observational Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e3120Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Brain and Behavior published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Brain Sci. 2022 Feb 23;12(3):
pubmed: 35326257
BMJ. 2005 Oct 15;331(7521):903
pubmed: 16223828
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020 Jun;101(6):1072-1089
pubmed: 32087109
Pain. 2010 Feb;148(2):215-219
pubmed: 19854576
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2022 Jul;103(7):1487-1498
pubmed: 35436496
Neurology. 2002 Feb 12;58(3):349-53
pubmed: 11839831
Rehabil Psychol. 2017 Aug;62(3):407-408
pubmed: 28836811
J Clin Epidemiol. 2004 Sep;57(9):898-910
pubmed: 15504633
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014 Sep;95(9):1672-84
pubmed: 24814459
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015 Jul;29(6):537-47
pubmed: 25613986
J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2016 Jul-Aug;31(4):E43-51
pubmed: 26360003
Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2005 Jul-Sep;15(3-4):442-53
pubmed: 16350985
Brain Behav. 2023 Aug;13(8):e3120
pubmed: 37303294
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021 Apr;102(4):591-597
pubmed: 33161008
J Neurotrauma. 2022 Oct;39(19-20):1417-1428
pubmed: 35570725
Neuroimage. 2002 Oct;17(2):732-41
pubmed: 12377148
Mayo Clin Proc. 2002 Apr;77(4):371-83
pubmed: 11936935
J Clin Epidemiol. 2000 May;53(5):459-68
pubmed: 10812317
J Clin Epidemiol. 2003 May;56(5):395-407
pubmed: 12812812
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1992 Jul;73(7):628-34
pubmed: 1622317
J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2023 Jul-Aug 01;38(4):E267-E277
pubmed: 36350037
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010 Dec;91(12):1795-813
pubmed: 21112421