Which Information Derived from the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised Provides the Most Reliable Prediction of Clinical Diagnosis and Recovery of Consciousness? A Comparative Study Using Machine Learning Techniques

Overview

Journal Eur J Phys Rehabil Med

Specialty Rehabilitation Medicine

Date 2024 Jan 9

PMID 38193722

Authors

Silvia Campagnini

Roberto Llorens

M Dolores Navarro

Carolina Colomer

Andrea Mannini

Anna Estraneo

Joan Ferri

Enrique Noe

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) is the most recommended clinical tool to examine the neurobehavioral condition of individuals with disorders of consciousness (DOCs). Different studies have investigated the prognostic value of the information provided by the conventional administration of the scale, while other measures derived from the scale have been proposed to improve the prognosis of DOCs. However, the heterogeneity of the data used in the different studies prevents a reliable comparison of the identified predictors and measures.

Aim: This study investigates which information derived from the CRS-R provides the most reliable prediction of both the clinical diagnosis and recovery of consciousness at the discharge of a long-term neurorehabilitation program.

Design: Retrospective observational multisite study.

Setting: The enrollment was performed in three neurorehabilitation facilities of the same hospital network.

Population: A total of 171 individuals with DOCs admitted to an inpatient neurorehabilitation program for a minimum of 3 months were enrolled.

Methods: Machine learning classifiers were trained to predict the clinical diagnosis and recovery of consciousness at discharge using clinical confounders and different metrics extracted from the CRS-R scale.

Results: Results showed that the neurobehavioral state at discharge was predicted with acceptable and comparable predictive value with all the indices and measures derived from the CRS-R, but for the clinical diagnosis and the Consciousness Domain Index, and the recovery of consciousness was predicted with higher accuracy and similarly by all the investigated measures, with the exception of initial clinical diagnosis.

Conclusions: Interestingly, the total score in the CRS-R and, especially, the total score in its subscales provided the best overall results, in contrast to the clinical diagnosis, which could indicate that a comprehensive measure of the clinical diagnosis rather than the condition of the individuals could provide a more reliable prediction of the neurobehavioral progress of individuals with prolonged DOC.

Clinical Rehabilitation Impact: The results of this work have important implications in clinical practice, offering a more accurate prognosis of patients and thus giving the possibility to personalize and optimize the rehabilitation plan of patients with DoC using low-cost and easily collectable information.

References

Umeda M, Corbin L, Maluf K . Preliminary investigation of absent nociceptive flexion reflex responses among more symptomatic women with fibromyalgia syndrome. Rheumatol Int. 2013; 33(9):2365-72. PMC: 3865982. DOI: 10.1007/s00296-013-2725-0. View

La Porta F, Caselli S, Ianes A, Cameli O, Lino M, Piperno R . Can we scientifically and reliably measure the level of consciousness in vegetative and minimally conscious States? Rasch analysis of the coma recovery scale-revised. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012; 94(3):527-535.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.09.035. View

Schnakers C, Vanhaudenhuyse A, Giacino J, Ventura M, Boly M, Majerus S . Diagnostic accuracy of the vegetative and minimally conscious state: clinical consensus versus standardized neurobehavioral assessment. BMC Neurol. 2009; 9:35. PMC: 2718857. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2377-9-35. View

Sandroni P, Martin D, Bruce B, Rome J . Congenital idiopathic inability to perceive pain: a new syndrome of insensitivity to pain and itch with preserved small fibers. Pain. 2006; 122(1-2):210-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2006.01.033. View

Annen J, Filippini M, Bonin E, Cassol H, Aubinet C, Carriere M . Diagnostic accuracy of the CRS-R index in patients with disorders of consciousness. Brain Inj. 2019; 33(11):1409-1412. DOI: 10.1080/02699052.2019.1644376. View

Carriere M, Llorens R, Navarro M, Olaya J, Ferri J, Noe E . Behavioral signs of recovery from unresponsive wakefulness syndrome to emergence of minimally conscious state after severe brain injury. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2021; 65(2):101534. DOI: 10.1016/j.rehab.2021.101534. View

Edlow B, Claassen J, Schiff N, Greer D . Recovery from disorders of consciousness: mechanisms, prognosis and emerging therapies. Nat Rev Neurol. 2020; 17(3):135-156. PMC: 7734616. DOI: 10.1038/s41582-020-00428-x. View

Giacino J, Ashwal S, Childs N, Cranford R, Jennett B, Katz D . The minimally conscious state: definition and diagnostic criteria. Neurology. 2002; 58(3):349-53. DOI: 10.1212/wnl.58.3.349. View

Giacino J, Katz D, Schiff N, Whyte J, Ashman E, Ashwal S . 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;.... Neurology. 2018; 91(10):461-470. PMC: 6139817. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000005928. View

10.

Giacino J, Kalmar K, Whyte J . The JFK Coma Recovery Scale-Revised: measurement characteristics and diagnostic utility. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004; 85(12):2020-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.02.033. View

11.

Calabro R, Naro A . Diagnosing Disorder of Consciousness: The Opening of Pandora's Box!. Innov Clin Neurosci. 2016; 13(3-4):10-1. PMC: 4911934. View

12.

Sattin D, Minati L, Rossi D, Covelli V, Giovannetti A, Rosazza C . The Coma Recovery Scale Modified Score: a new scoring system for the Coma Recovery Scale-revised for assessment of patients with disorders of consciousness. Int J Rehabil Res. 2015; 38(4):350-6. DOI: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000135. View

13.

Sousa V, Rojjanasrirat W . Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010; 17(2):268-74. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x. View

14.

Estraneo A, Moretta P, Loreto V, Lanzillo B, Cozzolino A, Saltalamacchia A . Predictors of recovery of responsiveness in prolonged anoxic vegetative state. Neurology. 2013; 80(5):464-70. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31827f0f31. View

15.

Wannez S, Heine L, Thonnard M, Gosseries O, Laureys S . The repetition of behavioral assessments in diagnosis of disorders of consciousness. Ann Neurol. 2017; 81(6):883-889. DOI: 10.1002/ana.24962. View

16.

Noe E, Olaya J, Dolores Navarro M, Noguera P, Colomer C, Garcia-Panach J . Behavioral recovery in disorders of consciousness: a prospective study with the Spanish version of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012; 93(3):428-33.e12. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.08.048. View

17.

Hirschberg R, Giacino J . The vegetative and minimally conscious states: diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. Neurol Clin. 2011; 29(4):773-86. DOI: 10.1016/j.ncl.2011.07.009. View

18.

Laureys S, Owen A, Schiff N . Brain function in coma, vegetative state, and related disorders. Lancet Neurol. 2004; 3(9):537-46. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(04)00852-X. View

19.

Liuzzi P, Grippo A, Campagnini S, Scarpino M, Draghi F, Romoli A . Merging Clinical and EEG Biomarkers in an Elastic-Net Regression for Disorder of Consciousness Prognosis Prediction. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2022; 30:1504-1513. DOI: 10.1109/TNSRE.2022.3178801. View

20.

Martens G, Bodien Y, Sheau K, Christoforou A, Giacino J . Which behaviours are first to emerge during recovery of consciousness after severe brain injury?. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2019; 63(4):263-269. DOI: 10.1016/j.rehab.2019.10.004. View