Challenging Mandatory Court Hearings for People in Vegetative and Minimally Conscious States

2021 ◽  
pp. 202-231
Author(s):  
Celia Kitzinger ◽  
Jenny Kitzinger
Keyword(s):  
2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin M. Monti ◽  
Adrian M. Owen

Recent evidence has suggested that functional neuroimaging may play a crucial role in assessing residual cognition and awareness in brain injury survivors. In particular, brain insults that compromise the patient’s ability to produce motor output may render standard clinical testing ineffective. Indeed, if patients were aware but unable to signal so via motor behavior, they would be impossible to distinguish, at the bedside, from vegetative patients. Considering the alarming rate with which minimally conscious patients are misdiagnosed as vegetative, and the severe medical, legal, and ethical implications of such decisions, novel tools are urgently required to complement current clinical-assessment protocols. Functional neuroimaging may be particularly suited to this aim by providing a window on brain function without requiring patients to produce any motor output. Specifically, the possibility of detecting signs of willful behavior by directly observing brain activity (i.e., “brain behavior”), rather than motoric output, allows this approach to reach beyond what is observable at the bedside with standard clinical assessments. In addition, several neuroimaging studies have already highlighted neuroimaging protocols that can distinguish automatic brain responses from willful brain activity, making it possible to employ willful brain activations as an index of awareness. Certainly, neuroimaging in patient populations faces some theoretical and experimental difficulties, but willful, task-dependent, brain activation may be the only way to discriminate the conscious, but immobile, patient from the unconscious one.


Author(s):  
Joshua Shepherd

This chapter argues for a normative distinction between disabilities that are inherently negative with respect to well-being and disabilities that are inherently neutral. After clarifying terms, the author discusses recent arguments according to which possession of a disability is inherently neutral with respect to well-being. He notes that although these arguments are compelling, they are only intended to cover certain disabilities and, in fact, that there exists a broad class regarding which they do not apply. He then discusses two problem cases: locked-in syndrome and the minimally conscious state, and explains why these are cases in which possession of these disabilities makes one worse off overall. He argues that disabilities that significantly impair control over one’s situation tend to be inherently negative with respect to well-being; other disabilities do not. The upshot is that we must draw an important normative distinction between disabilities that undermine this kind of control and disabilities that do not.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 126
Author(s):  
Enrique Noé ◽  
Joan Ferri ◽  
José Olaya ◽  
María Dolores Navarro ◽  
Myrtha O’Valle ◽  
...  

Accurate estimation of the neurobehavioral progress of patients with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) is essential to anticipate their most likely clinical course and guide clinical decision making. Although different studies have described this progress and possible predictors of neurobehavioral improvement in these patients, they have methodological limitations that could restrict the validity and generalization of the results. This study investigates the neurobehavioral progress of 100 patients with UWS consecutively admitted to a neurorehabilitation center using systematic weekly assessments based on standardized measures, and the prognostic factors of changes in their neurobehavioral condition. Our results showed that, during the analyzed period, 34% of the patients were able to progress from UWS to minimally conscious state (MCS), 12% of the total sample (near one third from those who progressed to MCS) were able to emerge from MCS, and 10% of the patients died. Transition to MCS was mostly denoted by visual signs, which appeared either alone or in combination with motor signs, and was predicted by etiology and the score on the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised at admission with an accuracy of 75%. Emergence from MCS was denoted in the same proportion by functional communication and object use. Predictive models of emergence from MCS and mortality were not valid and the identified predictors could not be accounted for.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 665
Author(s):  
Rocco Salvatore Calabrò ◽  
Loris Pignolo ◽  
Claudia Müller-Eising ◽  
Antonino Naro

Pain perception in individuals with prolonged disorders of consciousness (PDOC) is still a matter of debate. Advanced neuroimaging studies suggest some cortical activations even in patients with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) compared to those with a minimally conscious state (MCS). Therefore, pain perception has to be considered even in individuals with UWS. However, advanced neuroimaging assessment can be challenging to conduct, and its findings are sometimes difficult to be interpreted. Conversely, multichannel electroencephalography (EEG) and laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) can be carried out quickly and are more adaptable to the clinical needs. In this scoping review, we dealt with the neurophysiological basis underpinning pain in PDOC, pointing out how pain perception assessment in these individuals might help in reducing the misdiagnosis rate. The available literature data suggest that patients with UWS show a more severe functional connectivity breakdown among the pain-related brain areas compared to individuals in MCS, pointing out that pain perception increases with the level of consciousness. However, there are noteworthy exceptions, because some UWS patients show pain-related cortical activations that partially overlap those observed in MCS individuals. This suggests that some patients with UWS may have residual brain functional connectivity supporting the somatosensory, affective, and cognitive aspects of pain processing (i.e., a conscious experience of the unpleasantness of pain), rather than only being able to show autonomic responses to potentially harmful stimuli. Therefore, the significance of the neurophysiological approach to pain perception in PDOC seems to be clear, and despite some methodological caveats (including intensity of stimulation, multimodal paradigms, and active vs. passive stimulation protocols), remain to be solved. To summarize, an accurate clinical and neurophysiological assessment should always be performed for a better understanding of pain perception neurophysiological underpinnings, a more precise differential diagnosis at the level of individual cases as well as group comparisons, and patient-tailored management.


Brain Injury ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Sarah Elizabeth Patricia Munce ◽  
Fiona Webster ◽  
Jennifer Christian ◽  
Laura E. Gonzalez-Lara ◽  
Adrian M. Owen ◽  
...  

NeuroSci ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 254-265
Author(s):  
Jihad Aburas ◽  
Areej Aziz ◽  
Maryam Butt ◽  
Angela Leschinsky ◽  
Marsha L. Pierce

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the leading cause of loss of consciousness, long-term disability, and death in children and young adults (age 1 to 44). Currently, there are no United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved pharmacological treatments for post-TBI regeneration and recovery, particularly related to permanent disability and level of consciousness. In some cases, long-term disorders of consciousness (DoC) exist, including the vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (VS/UWS) characterized by the exhibition of reflexive behaviors only or a minimally conscious state (MCS) with few purposeful movements and reflexive behaviors. Electroceuticals, including non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), and deep brain stimulation (DBS) have proved efficacious in some patients with TBI and DoC. In this review, we examine how electroceuticals have improved our understanding of the neuroanatomy of consciousness. However, the level of improvements in general arousal or basic bodily and visual pursuit that constitute clinically meaningful recovery on the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) remain undefined. Nevertheless, these advancements demonstrate the importance of the vagal nerve, thalamus, reticular activating system, and cortico-striatal-thalamic-cortical loop in the process of consciousness recovery.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Manon Carrière ◽  
Helena Cassol ◽  
Charlène Aubinet ◽  
Rajanikant Panda ◽  
Aurore Thibaut ◽  
...  

Abstract Auditory localization (i.e. turning the head and/or the eyes towards an auditory stimulus) is often part of the clinical evaluation of patients recovering from coma. The objective of this study is to determine whether auditory localization could be considered as a new sign of minimally conscious state, using a multimodal approach. The presence of auditory localization and the clinical outcome at 2 years of follow-up were evaluated in 186 patients with severe brain injury, including 64 with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, 28 in minimally conscious state minus, 71 in minimally conscious state plus and 23 who emerged from the minimally conscious state. Brain metabolism, functional connectivity and graph theory measures were investigated by means of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, functional MRI and high-density electroencephalography in two subgroups of unresponsive patients, with and without auditory localization. These two subgroups were also compared to a subgroup of patients in minimally conscious state minus. Auditory localization was observed in 13% of unresponsive patients, 46% of patients in minimally conscious state minus, 62% of patients in minimally conscious state plus and 78% of patients who emerged from the minimally conscious state. The probability to observe an auditory localization increased along with the level of consciousness, and the presence of auditory localization could predict the level of consciousness. Patients with auditory localization had higher survival rates (at 2-year follow-up) than those without localization. Differences in brain function were found between unresponsive patients with and without auditory localization. Higher connectivity in unresponsive patients with auditory localization was measured between the fronto-parietal network and secondary visual areas, and in the alpha band electroencephalography network. Moreover, patients in minimally conscious state minus significantly differed from unresponsive patients without auditory localization in terms of brain metabolism and alpha network centrality, whereas no difference was found with unresponsive patients who presented auditory localization. Our multimodal findings suggest differences in brain function between unresponsive patients with and without auditory localization, which support our hypothesis that auditory localization should be considered as a new sign of minimally conscious state. Unresponsive patients showing auditory localization should therefore no longer be considered unresponsive but minimally conscious. This would have crucial consequences on these patients’ lives as it would directly impact the therapeutic orientation or end-of-life decisions usually taken based on the diagnosis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document