Giving Voice to Consciousness

Covert consciousness

Covert consciousness is a state of residual awareness following severe brain injury or neurological disorder that evades routine bedside behavioral detection. Patients with covert consciousness have preserved awareness but are incapable of self-expression through ordinary means of behavior or communication. Growing recognition of the limitations of bedside neurobehavioral examination in reliably detecting consciousness, along with advances in neurotechnologies capable of detecting brain states or subtle signs indicative of consciousness not discernible by routine examination, carry promise to transform approaches to classifying, diagnosing, prognosticating and treating disorders of consciousness. Here we describe and critically evaluate the evolving clinical category of covert consciousness, including approaches to its diagnosis through neuroimaging, electrophysiology, and novel behavioral tools, its prognostic relevance, and open questions pertaining to optimal clinical management of patients with covert consciousness recovering from severe brain injury.

The role of patients' stories in medicine: a systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patients' stories provide Palliative Care physicians with a glimpse into the former's lives and their psycho-emotional, sociocultural, and contextual considerations. Yet, few physicians are trained to interpret and apply patients' stories in their practice. Inherent variability in how stories are transmitted and interpreted raises questions over their potential effects on care. Amidst a dearth of accounts in Palliative Care, we map current use of patient stories to guide the training, assessment, and oversight of this 'care influencing' practice in medicine.

METHODS

This systematic scoping review was guided by the Systematic Evidence-Based Approach (SEBA) to ensure a reproducible and structured approach. The themes and categories identified through the Split Approach's concurrent and independent thematic and directed content analyses provided a comprehensive sketch of the included articles. The Jigsaw Perspective combined the themes and categories identified. The last stage of SEBA compared these results with two recent reviews of storytelling to ensure consistency of the domains created that guided the discussion.

RESULTS

Ten thousand two hundred seven articles were reviewed, 963 full text articles were evaluated, and 199 articles were included. The four domains identified were study characteristics, benefits, approaches, and positive effects and concerns.

CONCLUSION

Stories support patient-centered, personalized, and holistic clinical care. However, variability in the stories, their interpretations and use in care decisions underscore the need for further study on the structuring, teaching, assessing, and delivery of this 'care influencing' practice.

The neuroethics of disorders of consciousness: a brief history of evolving ideas

Neuroethical questions raised by recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of disorders of consciousness are rapidly expanding, increasingly relevant, and yet underexplored. The aim of this thematic review is to provide a clinically applicable framework for understanding the current taxonomy of disorders of consciousness and to propose an approach to identifying and critically evaluating actionable neuroethical issues that are frequently encountered in research and clinical care for this vulnerable population. Increased awareness of these issues and clarity about opportunities for optimizing ethically-responsible care in this domain are especially timely given recent surges in critically ill patients with unusually prolonged disorders of consciousness associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) around the world. We begin with an overview of the field of neuroethics: what it is, its history and evolution in the context of biomedical ethics at large. We then explore nomenclature used in disorders of consciousness, covering categories proposed by the American Academy of Neurology, the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine, and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research, including definitions of terms such as coma, the vegetative state, unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, minimally conscious state, covert consciousness, and the confusional state. We discuss why these definitions matter, and why there has been such evolution in this nosology over the years, from Jennett and Plum in 1972 to the Multi-Society Task Force in 1994, the Aspen Working Group in 2002 and up until the 2018 American and 2020 European Disorders of Consciousness guidelines. We then move to a discussion of clinical aspects of disorders of consciousness, the natural history of recovery, and ethical issues that arise within the context of caring for persons with disorders of consciousness. We conclude with a discussion of key challenges associated with assessing residual consciousness in disorders of consciousness, potential solutions and future directions, including integration of crucial disability rights perspectives.

Neuromodulatory therapies for patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness

Background:

Reviving patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness (DOCs) has always been focused and challenging in medical research. Owing to the limited effectiveness of available medicine, recent research has increasingly turned towards neuromodulatory therapies, involving the stimulation of neural circuits. We summarised the progression of research regarding neuromodulatory therapies in the field of DOCs, compared the differences among different studies, in an attempt to explore optimal stimulation patterns and parameters, and analyzed the major limitations of the relevant studies to facilitate future research.

Methods:

We performed a search in the PubMed database, using the concepts of DOCs and neuromodulation. Inclusion criteria were: articles in English, published after 2002, and reporting clinical trials of neuromodulatory therapies in human patients with DOCs.

Results:

Overall, 187 published articles met the search criteria, and 60 articles met the inclusion criteria. There are differences among these studies regarding the clinical efficacies of neurostimulation techniques for patients with DOCs, and large-sample studies are still lacking.

Conclusions:

Neuromodulatory techniques were used as trial therapies for DOCs wherein their curative effects were controversial. The difficulties in detecting residual consciousness, the confounding effect between the natural course of the disease and therapeutic effect, and the heterogeneity across patients are the major limitations. Large-sample, well-designed studies, and innovations for both treatment and assessment are anticipated in future research.

Constructive Disappointment and Disbelief: Building a Career in Neuroethics

Sometimes one's greatest academic disappointments can have unexpected outcomes. This is especially true when one is trying to change career trajectories or do something that others did not take seriously. My path into neuroethics was an unexpected journey catalyzed in part by constructive disappointment and the disbelief of colleagues who thought that the work I was pursuing nearly two decades prior was a fool's errand. After all, could anyone-in his or her right mind-ever conceive of waking up a person unconscious from brain injury and getting him to speak? 1.

Mosaic Decisionmaking and Reemergent Agency after Severe Brain Injury

Neuroethics Now welcomes articles addressing the ethical application of neuroscience in research and patient care, as well as its impact on society.

Deep brain stimulation for disorders of consciousness: Systematic review of cases and ethics

BACKGROUND

A treatment for patients suffering from prolonged severely altered consciousness is not available. The success of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) in diseases such as Parkinson's, dystonia and essential tremor provided a renewed impetus for its application in Disorders of Consciousness (DoC).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the rationale for DBS in patients with DoC, through systematic review of literature containing clinical data and ethical considerations.

METHODS

Articles from PubMed, Embase, Medline and Web of Science were systematically reviewed.

RESULTS

The outcomes of 78 individual patients reported in 19 articles from 1968 onwards were pooled and elements of ethical discussions were compared. There is no clear clinical evidence that DBS is a treatment for DoC that can restore both consciousness and the ability to communicate. In patients who benefitted, the outcome of DBS is often confounded by the time frame of spontaneous recovery from DoC. Difficult ethical considerations remain, such as the risk of increasing self-awareness of own limitations, without improving overall wellbeing, and the issues of proxy consent.

CONCLUSION

DBS is far from being evident as a possible future therapeutic avenue for patients with DoC. Double-blind studies are lacking, and many clinical and ethical issues have to be addressed. In the rare cases when DBS for patients with DoC is considered, this needs to be evaluated meticulously on a case by case basis, with comprehensive overall outcome measures including psychological and quality-of-life assessments, and with the guidance of an ethical and interdisciplinary panel, especially in relation to proxy consent.