Systematic and Evidence-Based Approach to Clinical Management of Patients with Disorders of Consciousness


Behavior

PTCS

MCS

VS

Eye opening

Spontaneous

Spontaneous

Spontaneous

Attention

Impaired selective/sustained attention

Inability to focus/sustain attention

None

Response to pain

Defensive/anticipatory

Localization

Posturing/withdrawal

Movement

Goal-directed/appropriate object use

Automatic/object manipulation

Reflexive/patterned

Visual response

Object recognition

Object recognition/pursuit

Startle

Commands

Consistent

Inconsistent

None

Verbalization

Intelligible sentences

Intelligible words

Random vocalizations

Communication

Reliable yes–no

Unreliable yes–no

None

Affective response

Contingent

Contingent

Random



Because there is no established objective test for conscious awareness, the determination of level of consciousness and corresponding diagnosis is based on a clinicians’ subjective appraisal of elicited behavior. There is growing evidence, however, that clinicians frequently misjudge level of consciousness. Investigations consistently report that 30–40 % of patients believed to be unconscious on bedside examination actually retain conscious awareness [810]. This error rate is largely due to an obligatory over-reliance on behavior as a proxy for consciousness. Although behavioral observations are considered the “gold standard” in the evaluation of level of consciousness, behavioral signs can be misleading [11]. Reflexive behaviors may appear to be volitional while volitional responses may be masked by underlying sensory and motor impairments. In addition, behavioral output often fluctuates and a single observational period may be insufficient to capture evidence of conscious awareness. Nonetheless, diagnostic accuracy is critical to assure appropriate clinical management, establish an accurate prognosis, and provide appropriate information to caregivers. Misdiagnosis may limit access to medical and rehabilitation services and inappropriately influence end-of-life decision-making, including premature withdrawal of life-sustaining care.

The primary goals of rehabilitation for persons in the early phases of recovery from severe brain injury are to maintain medical stability, restore communication, and promote independence in self-care. An array of treatment interventions, including pharmacotherapy, physical management strategies, and structured sensory stimulation, are routinely administered in the inpatient rehabilitation setting to promote recovery of cognitive and motor functions. However, the absence of well-controlled treatment studies has slowed the development of standards of care to guide clinical decision-making regarding treatment selection. This has led some observers to describe the current approach to rehabilitation as a “black box” [12]. As a result, treatment interventions are often selected and applied in a “trial and error” manner, and the evaluation of treatment effectiveness is subject to observer bias. In the absence of objective data, treatment may be withdrawn prematurely or prolonged unnecessarily, hindering the recovery process and wasting limited resources.

Against this backdrop of diagnostic uncertainty and the prevailing “trial and error” approach to treatment, we describe a systematic, evidence-based framework for clinical management of patients with DoC. The primary objective is to demonstrate how a standardized approach to assessment can be instituted in the rehabilitation setting to inform diagnostic, prognostic, and treatment decisions. The importance of adopting an empirical approach to clinical care is underscored by recent published evidence indicating that individuals with DoC recover over a longer period of time than previously thought, and many regain the capacity to function independently [1316].


Disorders of Consciousness Program Framework


The Spaulding Rehabilitation Network (SRN) Disorders of Consciousness Program was developed to provide a continuum of care specifically designed for individuals who have experienced severe acquired brain injury and have not yet regained the ability to follow instructions, communicate reliably, or perform basic self-care activities. The marked variability in the physical, cognitive, behavioral, and emotional sequelae of severe brain injury suggests that a one-size-fits-all model of rehabilitation is likely to be ineffective. In the remainder of this chapter, we describe a specialized 8-week program in which assessment and treatment procedures are standardized and administered systematically by a multidisciplinary neurorehabilitation team.

The 8-week SRN DoC Program is organized into three levels of care, each intended to address the clinical needs of patients functioning at different levels of consciousness. Program services are initiated and modified based on level-specific criteria. Level I focuses on individuals who have not yet recovered consciousness and whose level of functioning is consistent with coma or the vegetative state. Patients admitted to Level I are either unarousable or demonstrate fluctuations in arousal and display no command-following, purposeful movement, or communication ability. The Coma Recovery Scale-R (CRS-R) [17] (see description under section “Core Metrics”) is the primary assessment measure used at this level to track neurobehavioral recovery and monitor response to interventions. Behavioral and pharmacologic protocols are commonly employed to facilitate arousal at this level. Level II focuses on patients in the MCS who show clear but inconsistent evidence of conscious awareness, are unable to communicate reliably, and require maximum assistance for basic care. The transition from Level I to Level II requires demonstration of at least one feature of MCS on three consecutive CRS-R exams. The CRS-R and Individualized Quantitative Behavioral Assessment (IQBA) protocols [18], which rely on single-subject research methodology to investigate case-specific questions, are the key assessment procedures used at this level. Therapies designed to foster response consistency, augmentative communication, and environmental control strategies are typically initiated at this level. Level III focuses on individuals in the posttraumatic confusional state. Patients in PTCS are alert and have regained the ability to communicate reliably, but remain confused and highly distractible, often with sleep disturbance, impulsivity, and agitation. Progression to Level III is achieved once reliable yes–no responses are demonstrated across three consecutive CRS-R exams. The primary assessment measure used in Level III is the Confusion Assessment Protocol (CAP) [6], which monitors seven cardinal signs associated with acute confusion (see description in section “Core Metrics”).


DoC Program Care Map


In order to institute a systematic approach to care and maintain adherence to the program timeline, a specialized DoC Care Map was developed. The Care Map is divided into two sections. The discipline-specific section details the clinical services for which each rehabilitation specialist on the team is responsible. In contrast, the interdisciplinary section displays the activities that are shared by all team members. The Care Map specifies the timing of all assessment, treatment planning, and educational activities that are administered over the course of the 8-week program. The primary aim of the Care Map is to ensure that all components of the program are administered systematically and in accord with the pre-arranged timeline. Table 2 shows the interdisciplinary section of the DoC Program Care Map.


Table 2
SRN disorders of consciousness program care map







































































































































































































 
Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Week 7

Week 8

Assessment

Initial team assessment

X
             

Family interview to obtain history

X
             

Neurobehavioral clinic
 
X
           

Clinical team meeting
 
X
   
X
     

COMPASS administered

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Specialized metrics
   
X

X

X

X

X

X

Final review of data
             
X

Treatment

Interdisciplinary team conference (ITC)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Implement initial treatment intervention(s)
 
X

X

X
       

Implement revised treatment intervention(s)
       
X

X

X

X

Establish transition/discharge plan
         
X
   

Implement transition/discharge plan
           
X

X

Neurobehavioral profile finalized for transition/discharge
             
X

Family education

Family orientation w/case manager, nurse manager, and program director

X
             

Meeting w/outreach coordinator

X
             

Family team meeting w/clinical team
 
X
     
X
   

Family education seminar

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Assessment and treatment interventions are provided by a multidisciplinary team comprised of specialists in neuropsychology, physiatry, nursing, physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech language pathology, social work, case managers, and other specialists as appropriate. On admission to the DoC Program, participants undergo a standardized assessment carried out jointly by all members of the team. A comprehensive battery of “core metrics,” referred to as the “DOC COMPASS” (i.e., Disorders of Consciousness COMPrehensive ASSessment Battery), is administered to establish a functional baseline across multiple domains. Some of the core metrics are administered by all members of the team, while others are assigned to particular disciplines, based on expertise. A fixed assessment schedule has been established with the frequency of administration varying by measure. Table 3 provides a summary of the core metrics and corresponding assessment schedule.


Table 3
SRN DoC program assessment schedule





























































Neurobehavioral measure

When to start administration

Frequency

When to discontinue

Agitated Behavior Scale (ABS)

Admission

1× per nurse shift

3 consecutive days of scores ≤21

1× per therapy session

Coma-Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R)

Admission unless EMCS

2× per week

3 consecutive subscale scores of 4 for Auditory, 2 for Communication, and 3 for Arousal

Confusion Assessment Protocol (CAP)

Admission if EMCS or upon discontinuation of CRS-R

1× per week

2 consecutive scores of not confused

Galvenston Orientation Attention Test

Completion of the CAP if disorientation remained a symptom

1× per week

2 consecutive administration with Total Error points <25

Disability Rating Scale (DRS)

Admission

1× per week

Never

Functional Communication Measures (FCM)

Admission

Bi-weekly

Never

Limb Movement Protocol (LMP)

Admission

1× per week

2 consecutive scores of 72

Verbal Fluency

Consistent intelligible speech is present

1× per week

Never

Medical Complication Checklist

Admission

1× per week

Never


DOC COMPASS



Core Metrics


All patients admitted to the DoC Program undergo comprehensive assessment using a battery of core metrics that have been vetted for use in patients with DoC. Performance criteria have been established that determine when a particular core metric should be discontinued (e.g., when valid assessment is not possible) or transitioned to a “higher-level” measure (e.g., when ceiling effects are apparent). The section below provides a brief summary of the core metrics in the DOC COMPASS that were selected to represent particular domains of function.


Neurobehavioral Status


Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRSR): The CRS-R is a standardized measure of neurobehavioral function that has been widely used in differential diagnosis, prognostic assessment, and outcome measurement in persons with DOC [10, 17, 19, 20]. The scale consists of 23 behavioral items that are weighted to reflect progressively increasing neurologic function. There are six subscales designed to assess arousal level, audition and language comprehension, expressive speech, visuoperceptual abilities, motor functions, and communication ability. Scoring is based on the presence or absence of operationally defined behavioral responses elicited by standardized stimulus presentation. The lowest items on each subscale represent brain stem reflexes, while the highest items reflect cognitively mediated behaviors. The CRS-R has been shown to be reliable and valid when administered by licensed medical and rehabilitation personnel [17, 19, 20]. The scale is completed on admission to determine diagnosis (e.g., VS or MCS), establish a neurobehavioral baseline, and identify level of care. Following baseline assessment, the CRS-R is administered twice weekly to monitor rate of recovery. CRS-R administration is discontinued in favor of the CAP when the criteria for emergence from MCS (i.e., consistent functional object use and/or functional communication) are met on three consecutive examinations.

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Dec 11, 2016 | Posted by in NEUROLOGY | Comments Off on Systematic and Evidence-Based Approach to Clinical Management of Patients with Disorders of Consciousness

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access