Advertisement

Simplification of the coma recovery scale–revised in disorders of consciousness: A prospective observational study

Published:October 05, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2022.09.009

      Highlights

      • We chose 8 most commonly observed behaviors from the CRS-R to form simplified CRS-R.
      • The accuracy between simplified CRS-R and the standard CRS-R was comparable.
      • The simplified CRS-R could serve as a helpful screening tool for patients with DOC.

      Abstract

      The Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) is the gold standard behavioral assessment scale for diagnosis of patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC). The reliability of CRS-R in monitoring the state of consciousness is well established. It is widely used by experts working in the fields of DOC. However, it is complex, time-consuming and difficult to use by non-professionals. Hence, it is imperative to simplify the evaluation to ease clinical workflow and increase work efficiency. In this study we evaluated the accuracy of a simplified scale using only 8 most commonly observed behaviors from the standard 29-item CRS-R scale. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of the simplified evaluation process of CRS-R compared to the standard CRS-R, a total of 150 patients with DOC who were admitted to the Hospital of Zhejiang People’s Armed Police between February 2020 and September 2021 were screened in a prospective, observational study. Two trained clinicians used the CRS-R and the simplified CRS-R to evaluate the consciousness level of the enrolled patients, respectively. SPSS 23 was used for statistical analysis. Weighted kappa was used to demonstrate the level of agreement between the two methods. A p-value < 0.01 was considered to be statistically significant. Kappa coefficient was 0.952 (95 % CI: 0.905–0.999, p < 0.01), which indicated that the difference was statistically significant, thereby suggesting satisfactory level of agreement between the diagnostic outcomes of the CRS-R and simplified CRS-R. The simplified CRS-R could determine the state of consciousness of patients with ease and high accuracy.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Laureys S.
        • Boly M.
        The changing spectrum of coma. Nature clinical practice Neurology.
        Nat Clin Pract Neurol. 2008; 4: 544-546https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpneuro0887
        • Giacino J.T.
        • et al.
        Practice Guideline Update Recommendations Summary: Disorders of Consciousness: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology; the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine; and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018; 99: 1699-1709https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2018.07.001
        • Giacino J.T.
        • et al.
        Monitoring rate of recovery to predict outcome in minimally responsive patients.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1991; 72: 897-901https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9993(91)90008-7
        • Giacino J.T.
        • et al.
        The JFK Coma Recovery Scale-Revised: measurement characteristics and diagnostic utility.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004; 85: 2020-2029https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2004.02.033
      1. Recommendations for use of uniform nomenclature pertinent to patients with severe alterations in consciousness. American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;76(2):205-9. 10.1016/s0003-9993(95)80031-x.

        • Edlow B.L.
        • et al.
        Recovery from disorders of consciousness: mechanisms, prognosis and emerging therapies.
        Nat Rev Neurol. 2021; 17: 135-156https://doi.org/10.1038/s41582-020-00428-x
        • Plum F.
        • Posner J.B.
        The diagnosis of stupor and coma.
        Contemp Neurol Ser. 1972; 10: 1-286
      2. Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state (1). N Engl J Med. 1994;330(21):1499-508. 10.1056/nejm199405263302107.

        • Giacino J.T.
        • et al.
        The minimally conscious state: definition and diagnostic criteria.
        Neurology. 2002; 58: 349-353https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.58.3.349
      3. Lucia Francesca Lucca, et al. Outcome prediction in disorders of consciousness: the role of coma recovery scale revised. BMC Neurol.2019;19(1):68. https://doi: 10.1186/s12883-019-1293-7.

        • Monti M.M.
        • et al.
        The vegetative state BMJ. 2010; 341c3765https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c3765
      4. Bodien YG, et al. Sensitivity and Specificity of the Coma Recovery Scale--Revised Total Score in Detection of Conscious Awareness. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97(3):490-2.e1. 10.1016/j.apmr.2015.08.422.

        • Zhang Y.
        • et al.
        Validation of the Chinese version of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R).
        Brain Inj. 2019; 33: 529-533https://doi.org/10.1080/02699052.2019.1566832
        • Wannez S.
        • et al.
        Prevalence of coma-recovery scale-revised signs of consciousness in patients in minimally conscious state.
        Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2018; 28: 1350-1359https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2017.1310656
        • Seel R.T.
        • et al.
        Assessment scales for disorders of consciousness: evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice and research.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010; 91: 1795-1813https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2010.07.218
        • Thibaut A.
        • et al.
        Minimally conscious state “plus”: diagnostic criteria and relation to functional recovery.
        J Neurol. 2020; 267: 1245-1254https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-019-09628-y
        • Wang J.
        • et al.
        The misdiagnosis of prolonged disorders of consciousness by a clinical consensus compared with repeated coma-recovery scale-revised assessment.
        BMC Neurol. 2020; 20: 343https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-020-01924-9
        • Hammond F.M.
        • et al.
        Disorders of Consciousness due to Traumatic Brain Injury: Functional Status Ten Years Post-Injury.
        J Neurotrauma. 2019; 36: 1136-1146https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2018.5954
        • Giacino J.T.
        • et al.
        Comprehensive Systematic Review Update Summary: Disorders of Consciousness: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology; the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine; and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018; 99: 1710-1719https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2018.07.002
        • Martens G.
        • et al.
        Which behaviours are first to emerge during recovery of consciousness after severe brain injury?.
        Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2020; 63: 263-269https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2019.10.004
        • Di Perri C.
        • et al.
        Measuring consciousness in coma and related states.
        World J Radiol. 2014; 6: 589-597https://doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v6.i8.589
        • Schnakers C.
        • et al.
        Diagnostic accuracy of the vegetative and minimally conscious state: clinical consensus versus standardized neurobehavioral assessment.
        BMC Neurol. 2009; 9: 35https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2377-9-35
        • Wannez S.
        • et al.
        The repetition of behavioral assessments in diagnosis of disorders of consciousness.
        Ann Neurol. 2017; 81: 883-889https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24962
        • Formisano R.
        • et al.
        Coma Recovery Scale-Revised With and Without the Emotional Stimulation of Caregivers.
        Can J Neurol Sci. 2019; 46: 607-609https://doi.org/10.1017/cjn.2019.227
        • Bruno M.A.
        • et al.
        From unresponsive wakefulness to minimally conscious PLUS and functional locked-in syndromes: recent advances in our understanding of disorders of consciousness.
        J Neurol. 2011; 258: 1373-1384https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-011-6114-x