Abstract
The evaluation of the level of consciousness in patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC) is primarily based on behavioural assessments. Patients with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) do not show any sign of awareness of their environment, while minimally conscious state (MCS) patients show reproducible but fluctuating signs of awareness. Some patients, although with remaining cognitive abilities, are not able to exhibit overt voluntary responses at the bedside and may be misdiagnosed as UWS. Several studies investigated functional neuroimaging and neurophysiology as an additional tool to evaluate the level of consciousness and to detect covert command following in DOC. Most of these studies are based on auditory stimulation, neglecting patients suffering from decreased or absent hearing abilities. In the present study, we aim to assess the response to a P3-based paradigm in 40 patients with DOC and 12 healthy participants using auditory (AEP) and vibrotactile (VTP) stimulation. To this end, an EEG-based brain-computer interface was used at DOC patient’s bedside. We compared the significance of the P3 performance (i.e., the interpretation of significance of the evoked P3 response) as obtained by ‘direct processing’ (i.e., theoretical-based significance threshold) and ‘offline processing’ (i.e., permutation-based single subject level threshold). We evaluated whether the P3 performances were dependent on clinical variables such as diagnosis (UWS and MCS), aetiology and time since injury. Last we tested the dependency of AEP and VTP performances at the single subject level. Direct processing tends to overestimate P3 performance. We did not find any difference in the presence of a P3 performance according to the level of consciousness (UWS vs. MCS) or the aetiology (traumatic vs. non-traumatic brain injury). The performance achieved at the AEP paradigm was independent from what was achieved at the VTP paradigm, indicating that some patients performed better on the AEP task while others performed better on the VTP task. Our results support the importance of using multimodal approaches in the assessment of DOC patients in order to optimise the evaluation of patient’s abilities.
Highlights
Following a severe brain injury, patients may fall into a coma
Patients were older than healthy participants (t (34.06) = −6.21, p < 0.0001, 95% CI = [−27.1, −13.7]), but age did not differ amongst the different patient groups
More unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) than minimally conscious state (MCS) patients suffered from a non-traumatic brain injury (χ2 = 7.73, p = 0.048) but no difference was found for time since injury (F (2, 36) = 1.82, p = 0.18)
Summary
Following a severe brain injury, patients may fall into a coma. Some of these patients evolve into a state with decreased awareness in the presence of eye opening, referred to as disorders of consciousness (DOC). In this state, patients can either only present reflexive behaviour without signs of awareness (unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, UWS [1], referred to as vegetative state [2]), or present minimal signs of awareness (minimally conscious state, MCS [3]). A limitation of the behavioural assessment is that it is highly dependent on motor and language abilities. The vast majority of DOC patients suffers from visual, auditory or motor limitations (e.g., spasticity in 88–96% of DOC patients [6,7]) that can impede their behavioural evaluation [8]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call