Developing the Disorders of Consciousness Guideline and Challenges of Integrating Shared Decision-Making Into Clinical Practice

International survey on the implementation of the European and American guidelines on disorders of consciousness

Diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic procedures for patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness (pDoCs) vary significantly across countries and clinical settings, likely due to organizational factors (e.g., research vs. non-academic hospitals), expertise and availability of resources (e.g., financial and human). Two international guidelines, one from the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) and one from the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) in collaboration with the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM) and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR), were developed to facilitate consistent practice among professionals working with this challenging patient population. While the recommendations of both guidelines agree in principle, it remains an open issue how to implement them into clinical practice in the care pathway for patients with pDoCs. We conducted an online survey to explore health professional clinical practices related to the management of patients with pDoCs, and compare said practices with selected recommendations from both the guidelines. The survey revealed that while some recommendations are being followed, others are not and/or may require more honing/specificity to enhance their clinical utility. Particular attention should be given to the implementation of a multimodal assessment of residual consciousness, to the detection and treatment of pain, and to the impact of restrictions imposed by COVID-19 pandemics on the involvement of patients' families/representatives.

The Neurological Rehabilitation of Adults With Coma and Disorders of Consciousness

BACKGROUND

Severe quantitative disorders of consciousness (DoC) due to acute brain injury affect up to 47% of patients upon admission to intensive care and early rehabilitation units. Nevertheless, the rehabilitation of this vulnerable group of patients has not yet been addressed in any German-language guidelines and has only been studied in a small number of randomized clinical trials.

METHODS

In an S3 clinical practice guideline project, a systematic literature search was carried out for interventions that could improve consciousness in patients with coma, unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, or minimally conscious state after acute brain injury, and an evidence-based evaluation of these interventions was performed. Recommendations concerning diagnostic methods and medical ethics were issued by consensus.

RESULTS

Misdiagnoses are common in patients with DoC, with minimal consciousness often going unrecognized. Patients with DoC should, therefore, be repeatedly assessed with standardized instruments, particularly the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised. The literature search yielded 54 clinical trials, mostly of low quality; there were two randomized controlled clinical trials providing level 1 evidence. The best available evidence for the improvement of impaired consciousness is for the administration of amantadine (4 studies) and for anodal transcranial direct-current stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in patients in the minimal conscious state (8 studies, 2 systematic reviews). Further important components of rehabilitation include positioning methods and sensory stimulation techniques such as music therapy.

CONCLUSION

For the first time, evidence-based German-language clinical practice guidelines have now become available for the neurological rehabilitation of patients with DoC.

Determinants of Awareness of Clinical Practice Guidelines among Healthcare Users in Japan

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are used by both healthcare users and providers, so their recognition is important. The present study's purpose was to clarify the features of healthcare users who are aware of the CPGs. A cross-sectional survey was conducted targeting Internet survey panels (n = 6000). The study participants (age range, 20s to 60s) had no medical qualifications and had received medical care in the last 3 months. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to clarify the factors related to the awareness of CPGs. When "I have seen the CPGs" was used as the objective variable, the odds ratios (ORs) were high for "e-health literacy/score 31-40" (OR = 8.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.51-11.68), "Sources of health information/healthcare workers and professionals" (OR = 2.61, 95% CI: 2.17-3.14), "Age/20s" (OR = 2.38, 95% CI: 1.74-3.23), and "I have been diagnosed and treated for a major illness" (OR = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.52-2.65). These results could be applied to aid the dissemination and utilization of CPGs among healthcare users.

For which decisions is Shared Decision Making considered appropriate? - A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To identify decision characteristics for which SDM authors deem SDM appropriate or not, and what arguments are used.

METHODS

We applied two search strategies: we included SDM models from an earlier review (strategy 1) and conducted a new search in eight databases to include papers other than describing an SDM model, such as original research, opinion papers and reviews (strategy 2).

RESULTS

From the 92 included papers, we identified 18 decision characteristics for which authors deemed SDM appropriate, including preference-sensitive, equipoise and decisions where patient commitment is needed in implementing the decision. SDM authors indicated limits to SDM, especially when there are immediate life-saving measures needed. We identified four decision characteristics on which authors of different papers disagreed on whether or not SDM is appropriate.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this review show the broad range of decision characteristics for which authors deem SDM appropriate, the ambiguity of some, and potential limits of SDM.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The findings can stimulate clinicians to (re)consider pursuing SDM in situations in which they did not before. Additionally, it can inform SDM campaigns and educational programs as it shows for which decision situations SDM might be more or less challenging to practice.

Ethical and legal considerations related to disorders of consciousness

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to describe ethical and legal issues that arise in the management of patients with disorders of consciousness ranging from the minimally conscious state to the coma state, as well as brain death.

RECENT FINDINGS

The recent literature highlights dilemmas created by diagnostic and prognostic uncertainties in patients with disorders of consciousness. The discussion also reveals the challenges experienced by the disability community, which includes individuals with severe brain injury who are classified as having a disorder of consciousness. We review current guidelines for management of patients with disorders of consciousness including discussions around diagnosis, prognosis, consideration of neuropalliation, and decisions around life sustaining medical treatment.

SUMMARY

In the setting of uncertainty, this review describes the utility of applying a disability rights perspective and shared decision-making process to approach medical decision-making for patients with disorders of consciousness. We outline approaches to identifying surrogate decision makers, standards for decision-making and decision-making processes, specifically addressing the concept of futility as a less useful framework for making decisions. We also highlight special considerations for research, innovative and controversial care, brain death, organ donation, and child abuse and neglect.