Functional outcomes following post-acute rehabilitation for moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the benefits of long-term inpatient rehabilitation for individuals with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injuries (TBIs). METHODS: Retrospective database review of 67 individuals with moderate-to-severe TBI admitted to a specialised inpatient TBI program. Outcome measures are as follows: (1) functional independence measure + functional assessment measure (FIM+FAM; admission, discharge, change scores); (2) discharge designation (community vs. long-term care (LTC)). RESULTS: There was a mean improvement on FIM+FAM of 54.19 points (SD = 35.63) or 67% between admission and discharge (t(66) = -12.45, p < 0.001). Mean time post-injury upon completion of therapy was 409.59 days (SD = 343.93). Upon completion of rehabilitation, 50 (75%) participants were discharged to community and 17 to LTC. Among those returning to community, those with longer length of stays were more severely disabled on admission (t(35.9) = -4.86, p < 0.001). Controlling for admission functional status, individuals returning to community following >90 days of therapy required a mean of 378.94 days (SD = 298.86) to achieve comparable gains to those less impaired who received shorter periods of rehabilitation (F(1) = 0.530, p = 0.47). CONCLUSION: Continued specialised inpatient services following acute inpatient rehabilitation for individuals with moderate-to-severe TBI can reduce the level of dependency and enhance the likelihood of return to community living.

Clinical management of the minimally conscious state.

The minimally conscious state (MCS) was defined as a disorder of consciousness (DoC) distinct from the vegetative state more than a decade ago. While this condition has become widely recognized, there are still no guidelines to steer the approach to assessment and treatment. The development of evidence-based practice guidelines for MCS has been hampered by ambiguity around the concept of consciousness, the lack of accurate methods of assessment, and the dearth of well-designed clinical trials. This chapter provides a critical review of existing assessment procedures, critically reviews available treatment options and identifies knowledge gaps. We close with practice-based recommendations for a rational approach to clinical management of this challenging population.

Assessment scales for disorders of consciousness: evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice and research.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review of behavioral assessment scales for disorders of consciousness (DOC); provide evidence-based recommendations for clinical use based on their content validity, reliability, diagnostic validity, and ability to predict functional outcomes; and provide research recommendations on DOC scale development and validation. DATA SOURCES: Articles published through March 31, 2009, using MEDLINE, CINAHL, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Biomedical Reference Collection, and PsycINFO. Thirteen primary terms that defined DOC were paired with 30 secondary terms that defined aspects of measurement. Scale names, abbreviations, and authors were also used as search terms. Task force members identified additional articles by using personal knowledge and examination of references in reviewed articles. STUDY SELECTION: Primary criteria included the following: (1) provided reliability, diagnostic validity, and/or prognostic validity data; (2) examined a cohort, case control, or case series sample of persons with DOC who were age older than or equal to 18 years; and (3) assessed in an acute care or rehabilitation setting. Articles were excluded if peer review was not conducted, original data were not reported, or an English language article was not available. The initial search yielded 580 articles. After paired rater review of study abstracts, guideline development was based on 37 articles representing 13 DOC scales. DATA EXTRACTION: Rater pairs classified studies addressing diagnostic and prognostic validity by using the American Academy of Neurology 4-tier level of evidence scheme, and reliability by using a task force-developed 3-tier evidence scheme. An independent quality review of ratings was conducted, and corrections were made. DATA SYNTHESIS: The Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R), Sensory Stimulation Assessment Measure (SSAM), Wessex Head Injury Matrix (WHIM), Western Neuro Sensory Stimulation Profile (WNSSP), Sensory Modality Assessment Technique (SMART), Disorders of Consciousness Scale (DOCS), and Coma/Near-Coma Scale (CNC) have acceptable standardized administration and scoring procedures. The CRS-R has excellent content validity and is the only scale to address all Aspen Workgroup criteria. The SMART, SSAM, WHIM, and WNSSP demonstrate good content validity, containing items that could distinguish persons who are in a vegetative state, are in a minimally conscious state (MCS), or have emerged from MCS. The Full Outline of UnResponsiveness Score (FOUR), WNSSP, CRS-R, Comprehensive Levels of Consciousness Scale (CLOCS), and Innsbruck Coma Scale (INNS) showed substantial evidence of internal consistency. The FOUR and the CRS-R showed substantial evidence of good interrater reliability. Evidence of diagnostic validity and prognostic validity in brain injury survivor samples had very high levels of potential bias because of methodologic issues such as lack of rater masking. CONCLUSIONS: The CRS-R may be used to assess DOC with minor reservations, and the SMART, WNSSP, SSAM, WHIM, and DOCS may be used to assess DOC with moderate reservations. The CNC may be used to assess DOC with major reservations. The FOUR, INNS, Glasgow-Liege Coma Scale, Swedish Reaction Level Scale-1985, Loewenstein Communication Scale, and CLOCS are not recommended at this time for bedside behavioral assessment of DOC because of a lack of content validity, lack of standardization, and/or unproven reliability.