Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27359335›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Outcome Prediction of Consciousness Disorders in the Acute Stage Based on a Complementary Motor Behavioural Tool.

Jean-Michel Pignat, Etienne Mauron, Jane Jöhr, Charlotte Gilart de Keranflec'h, Dimitri Van De Ville, Maria Giulia Preti, Djalel E Meskaldji, Volker Hömberg, Steven Laureys, Bogdan Draganski and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Prognosis of consciousness disorders in the intensive care unit.Presse medicale (Paris, France : 1983) · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Jean-Michel PignatAcute Neurorehabilitation Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Etienne MauronFaculty of Medicine, Lausanne University, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Jane JöhrAcute Neurorehabilitation Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Charlotte Gilart de Keranflec'hAcute Neurorehabilitation Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Dimitri Van De VilleInstitute of Bioengineering, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Maria Giulia PretiInstitute of Bioengineering, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Djalel E MeskaldjiInstitute of Bioengineering, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Volker HömbergDepartment of Neurology, SRH-Gesundheitszentrum, Bad Wimpfen, Germany.
Steven LaureysComa Science Group, University of Liege, Liege, Belgium.
Bogdan DraganskiDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Richard FrackowiakDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Karin DiserensAcute Neurorehabilitation Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
University Hospital of Lausanne · CHUniversity of Geneva · CHLandeszentrum Gesundheit Nordrhein-Westfalen · DEUniversity of Lausanne · CHUniversity of Liège · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAttaining an accurate diagnosis in the acute phase for severely brain-damaged patients presenting Disorders of Consciousness (DOC) is crucial for prognostic validity; such a diagnosis determines further medical management, in terms of therapeutic choices and end-of-life decisions. However, DOC evaluation based on validated scales, such as the Revised Coma Recovery Scale (CRS-R), can lead to an underestimation of consciousness and to frequent misdiagnoses particularly in cases of cognitive motor dissociation due to other aetiologies. The purpose of this study is to determine the clinical signs that lead to a more accurate consciousness assessment allowing more reliable outcome prediction.

methodsFrom the Unit of Acute Neurorehabilitation (University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland) between 2011 and 2014, we enrolled 33 DOC patients with a DOC diagnosis according to the CRS-R that had been established within 28 days of brain damage. The first CRS-R assessment established the initial diagnosis of Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome (UWS) in 20 patients and a Minimally Consciousness State (MCS) in the remaining13 patients. We clinically evaluated the patients over time using the CRS-R scale and concurrently from the beginning with complementary clinical items of a new observational Motor Behaviour Tool (MBT). Primary endpoint was outcome at unit discharge distinguishing two main classes of patients (DOC patients having emerged from DOC and those remaining in DOC) and 6 subclasses detailing the outcome of UWS and MCS patients, respectively. Based on CRS-R and MBT scores assessed separately and jointly, statistical testing was performed in the acute phase using a non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test; longitudinal CRS-R data were modelled with a Generalized Linear Model.

resultsFifty-five per cent of the UWS patients and 77% of the MCS patients had emerged from DOC. First, statistical prediction of the first CRS-R scores did not permit outcome differentiation between classes; longitudinal regression modelling of the CRS-R data identified distinct outcome evolution, but not earlier than 19 days. Second, the MBT yielded a significant outcome predictability in the acute phase (p<0.02, sensitivity>0.81). Third, a statistical comparison of the CRS-R subscales weighted by MBT became significantly predictive for DOC outcome (p<0.02). DISCUSSION: The association of MBT and CRS-R scoring improves significantly the evaluation of consciousness and the predictability of outcome in the acute phase. Subtle motor behaviour assessment provides accurate insight into the amount and the content of consciousness even in the case of cognitive motor dissociation.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedConsciousness DisordersFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysical ExaminationPrognosisRecovery of FunctionTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID27359335
PMCPMC4928790
OpenAlexW2471158487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.