Effect of posture on levels of arousal and awareness in vegetative and minimally conscious state patients: a preliminary investigation

Comparisons of musculoskeletal complaints and data entry between a sitting and a sit-stand workstation paradigm

BACKGROUND

Seated working positions are often regarded as a cause for discomfort in the musculoskeletal system. Performing work in different working positions--that is, alternating between sitting and standing (sit-stand workstation paradigm)--could help reduce physical complaints.

OBJECTIVE

The questions were whether performing office work partly in a standing position leads to reduced complaints and whether standing would change the efficiency of data entry office work.

METHOD

We investigated the effect of a sit-stand workstation paradigmd during experimental data entry office work on physical and psychological complaints and data entry efficiency by conducting a randomized controlled trial with 60 male participants ages 18 to 35 years.

RESULTS

In this experiment, musculoskeletal complaints were reduced by a sit-stand workstation paradigm. A trend could be identified indicating a small but nonsignificant loss of efficiency in data entry while standing.

CONCLUSION

A sit-stand workstation paradigm reduces musculoskeletal complaints without considerably affecting data entry efficiency under the presented study conditions (young male participants, short duration, fixed and controlled sit-stand workstation paradigm, simulated experimental working condition).

APPLICATION

According to the present data, implementing a sit-stand workstation paradigm can be an effective workplace health intervention to reduce musculoskeletal complaints. This experiment encourages further studies on the effectiveness of a sit-stand workstation paradigm. Experimental research and field studies that prove the reduction of complaints when introducing a sit-stand workstation paradigm in the workplace could be the basis for evidence-based recommendations regarding such interventions.

Comparison of orthostatic reactions of patients still unconscious within the first three months of brain injury on a tilt table with and without integrated stepping. A prospective, randomized crossover pilot trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether passive leg movement during tilt table mobilization reduces the incidence of orthostatic dysfunction in mobilization of patients being comatose or semi-comatose early after brain injury.

DESIGN

Randomized crossover pilot trial using sequential testing.

SETTING

Neurorehabilitation hospital.

SUBJECTS

Nine patients still unconscious within the first three months of brain injury (5 men, 4 women; age 51 +/- 20 years).

INTERVENTION

Patients were subjected once to a conventional tilt table and once to a tilt table with an integrated stepping device.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The number of syncopes/presyncopes (orthostatic hypotension, tachypnoea, increased sweating) during interventions.

RESULTS

One patient had presyncopes on both devices, six patients had presyncopes on the conventional tilt table but not on the tilt table with integrated stepping, and two patients did not exhibit presyncopal symptoms on either device. There were significantly more incidents on the tilt table without than on the one with an integrated stepping device (P < 0.05) at tilts of 50 or 70 degrees respectively.

CONCLUSION

Patients tolerate greater degrees of head-up tilt better with simultaneous leg movement.

You are only coming through in waves: wakefulness variability and assessment in patients with impaired consciousness

The vegetative state (VS) is defined as a condition of wakefulness without awareness. Being awake and being asleep are two behavioral and physiological manifestations of the daily cycles of vigilance and metabolism. International guidelines for the diagnosis of VS propose that a patient fulfills criteria for wakefulness if he/she exhibits cycles of eye closure and eye opening giving the impression of a preserved sleep-wake cycle. We argue that these criteria are insufficient and we suggest guidelines to address wakefulness in a more comprehensive manner in this complex and heterogeneous group of patients. Four factors underlying wakefulness, as well as their interactions, are considered: arousal/responsiveness, circadian rhythms, sleep cycle, and homeostasis. The first refers to the arousability and capacity to, consciously or not, respond to external stimuli. The second deals with the circadian clock as a synchronizer of physiological functions to environmental cyclic changes. The third evaluates general sleep patterns, while homeostasis refers to the capacity of the body to regulate its internal state and maintain a stable condition. We present examples of reflex responses, activity rhythms, and electroencephalographic (EEG) measurements from patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC) to illustrate these factors of wakefulness. If properly assessed, they would help in the evaluation of consciousness by informing when and in which context the patient is likely to exhibit maximal responsiveness. This evaluation has the potential to improve diagnosis and treatment and may also add prognostic value to the multimodal assessment in DOC.

A multimodal approach to the assessment of patients with disorders of consciousness

Unlike other neurological conditions, the heterogeneous pathology linked to disorders of consciousness currently excludes a distinction between the vegetative and minimally conscious states based upon pathological presentation. The clinical assessment is therefore made on the basis of the patient's clinical history and exhibited behaviour. This creates a particular challenge for the clinician who has to decide whether a certain behaviour, which might be inconsistent or incomplete, reflects a conscious or an unconscious process. In an alarmingly high number of cases, identified during clinical audit, this decision process has been shown to be particularly fallible. The behavioural assessment is not only highly subjective, but also dependent upon the ability of the patient to move or speak; it is the only way someone can demonstrate they are aware. To address this problem we propose a multimodal approach, which integrates objective tools, such as electrophysiology and functional brain imaging, with traditional behavioural scales. Together this approach informs the clinical decision process and resolves many of the dilemmas faced by clinicians interpreting solely behavioural indices. This approach not only provides objective information regarding the integrity of residual cognitive function, but also removes the dependency on the patient to move or speak by using specially designed paradigms that do not require a motor output in order to reveal awareness of self or environment. To demonstrate this approach we describe the case of BW, who sustained a traumatic brain injury seven months prior to investigation. BW was admitted to a five-day assessment programme, which implemented our multimodal approach. On behavioural assessment BW demonstrated evidence of orientation and visual pursuit. However, he showed no response to written or verbal command, despite holding command cards and scanning text. Electrophysiology confirmed that he retained a preserved neural axis supporting vision and hearing, and suggested some evidence that he was able to create a basic memory trace. A hierarchical fMRI auditory paradigm suggested he was able to perceive sound and speech, but revealed no evidence of speech comprehension or ability to respond to command. This was corroborated in the visual modality using a hierarchical paradigm demonstrating that he was able to perceive motion, objects and faces, but retained no evidence of being able to respond to command. We briefly review work by other teams advocating the use of brain imaging and electrophysiology and discuss the steps that are now required in order to create an international standard for the assessment of persons with impaired consciousness after brain injury.

How should functional imaging of patients with disorders of consciousness contribute to their clinical rehabilitation needs?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We discuss the problems of evidence-based neurorehabilitation in disorders of consciousness, and recent functional neuroimaging data obtained in the vegetative state and minimally conscious state.

RECENT FINDINGS

Published data are insufficient to make recommendations for or against any of the neurorehabilitative treatments in vegetative state and minimally conscious state patients. Electrophysiological and functional imaging studies have been shown to be useful in measuring residual brain function in noncommunicative brain-damaged patients. Despite the fact that such studies could in principle allow an objective quantification of the putative cerebral effect of rehabilitative treatment in the vegetative state and minimally conscious state, they have so far not been used in this context.

SUMMARY

Without controlled studies and careful patient selection criteria it will not be possible to evaluate the potential of therapeutic interventions in disorders of consciousness. There also is a need to elucidate the neurophysiological effects of such treatments. Integration of multimodal neuroimaging techniques should eventually improve our ability to disentangle differences in outcome on the basis of underlying mechanisms and better guide our therapeutic options in the challenging patient populations encountered following severe acute brain damage.

Neurorehabilitation issues in states of disordered consciousness following traumatic brain injury

The assessment and care of persons with disorders of consciousness (DOC) following catastrophic traumatic brain injury is often difficult and filled with both challenges and potential controversies. Rates of misdiagnosis of low-level neurological state (LLNS) patients with signs of awareness as being vegetative have been noted to be unacceptably high and call for better education and training regarding the assessment methodologies of individuals with DOC. Clinician knowledge regarding prognostication and neural recovery from LLNSs following traumatic brain injury is often lacking, as is awareness of the neurorehabilitative interventions that can potentially facilitate recovery, as well as minimize morbidity and mortality in this unique population of neurological patients.

Chronic disorders of consciousness

The vegetative state and the minimally conscious state are disorders of consciousness that can be acute and reversible or chronic and irreversible. Diffuse lesions of the thalami, cortical neurons, or the white-matter tracts that connect them cause the vegetative state, which is wakefulness without awareness. Functional imaging with PET and functional MRI shows activation of primary cortical areas with stimulation, but not of secondary areas or distributed neural networks that would indicate awareness. Vegetative state has a poor prognosis for recovery of awareness when present for more than a year in traumatic cases and for 3 months in non-traumatic cases. Patients in minimally conscious state are poorly responsive to stimuli, but show intermittent awareness behaviours. Indeed, findings of preliminary functional imaging studies suggest that some patients could have substantially intact awareness. The outcomes of minimally conscious state are variable. Stimulation treatments have been disappointing in vegetative state but occasionally improve minimally conscious state. Treatment decisions for patients in vegetative state or minimally conscious state should follow established ethical and legal principles and accepted practice guidelines of professional medical specialty societies.

Residual cognitive function in comatose, vegetative and minimally conscious states

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The clinical evaluation of cognition in non-communicative severely brain-damaged patients is inherently difficult. In addition to novel behavioural 'consciousness-scales', the role of para-clinical markers of consciousness, such as event related potentials and functional neuroimaging is reviewed.

RECENT FINDINGS

New behavioural scales for vegetative and minimally conscious patients have been shown to reduce diagnostic error but regrettably remain underused in clinical routine. Electrophysiological studies have confirmed their role in estimating outcome and possibly cognition. Several recent functional neuroimaging studies have shown residual cortical function in undeniably vegetative patients. This cortical activation, however, seems limited to primary 'low-level' areas and does not imply 'higher-order' integration, considered necessary for conscious perception. Minimally conscious patients show large-scale high-order cerebral activation, apparently dependent upon the emotional relevance of the stimulation.

SUMMARY

Careful clinical assessment of putative 'conscious behaviour' in vegetative and minimally conscious patients is the first requirement for their proper diagnosis and management. Complementary functional neuroimaging and electrophysiological studies will have a major impact on future clinical decision making and may guide selective therapeutic options. At present, more experimental evidence and the elucidation of methodological and ethical controversies are awaited prior to their routine clinical use.

Rehabilitation interventions for vegetative and minimally conscious patients

Brain injury rehabilitation is a complex and challenging task for all members of the multidisciplinary team. Medical advances have allowed more severely impaired patients to survive and consequently the number of patients in the vegetative and minimally conscious states have proportionately increased. Thus, the need for evidence-based practice and further research demonstrating the effects of specific rehabilitation interventions is required. This article reviews the current research and consensus on rehabilitation for patients in the vegetative and minimally conscious states.