Ethics Priorities of the Curing Coma Campaign: An Empirical Survey

Limitation of life sustaining therapy in disorders of consciousness: ethics and practice

Clinical conversations surrounding the continuation or limitation of life-sustaining therapies (LLST) are both challenging and tragically necessary for patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) following severe brain injury. Divergent cultural, philosophical and religious perspectives contribute to vast heterogeneity in clinical approaches to LLST-as reflected in regional differences and inter-clinician variability. Here we provide an ethical analysis of factors that inform LLST decisions among patients with DoC. We begin by introducing the clinical and ethical challenge and clarifying the distinction between withdrawing and withholding life-sustaining therapy. We then describe relevant factors that influence LLST decision-making including diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty, perception of pain, defining a 'good' outcome, and the role of clinicians. In concluding sections, we explore global variation in LLST practices as they pertain to patients with DoC and examine the impact of cultural and religious perspectives on approaches to LLST. Understanding and respecting the cultural and religious perspectives of patients and surrogates is essential to protecting patient autonomy and advancing goal-concordant care during critical moments of medical decision-making involving patients with DoC.

Characterizing coma in large vessel occlusion stroke

BACKGROUND

Coma is an unresponsive state of disordered consciousness characterized by impaired arousal and awareness. The epidemiology and pathophysiology of coma in ischemic stroke has been underexplored. We sought to characterize the incidence and clinical features of coma as a presentation of large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke.

METHODS

Individuals who presented with LVO were retrospectively identified from July 2018 to December 2020. Coma was defined as an unresponsive state of impaired arousal and awareness, operationalized as a score of 3 on NIHSS item 1a.

RESULTS

28/637 (4.4%) patients with LVO stroke were identified as presenting with coma. The median NIHSS was 32 (IQR 29-34) for those with coma versus 11 (5-18) for those without (p < 0.0001). In coma, occlusion locations included basilar (13), vertebral (2), internal carotid (5), and middle cerebral (9) arteries. 8/28 were treated with endovascular thrombectomy (EVT), and 20/28 died during the admission. 65% of patients not treated with EVT had delayed presentations or large established infarcts. In models accounting for pre-stroke mRS, basilar occlusion location, intravenous thrombolysis, and EVT, coma independently increased the odds of transitioning to comfort care during admission (aOR 6.75; 95% CI 2.87,15.84; p < 0.001) and decreased the odds of 90-day mRS 0-2 (aOR 0.12; 95% CI 0.03,0.55; p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

It is not uncommon for patients with LVO to present with coma, and delayed recognition of LVO can lead to poor outcomes, emphasizing the need for maintaining a high index of suspicion. While more commonly thought to result from posterior LVO, coma in our cohort was similarly likely to result from anterior LVO. Efforts to improve early diagnosis and care of patients with LVO presenting with coma are crucial.

Disorders of Consciousness Rehabilitation: Ethical Dimensions and Epistemic Dilemmas

Patients with disorders of consciousness who survive to discharge following severe acute brain injury may face profoundly complex medical, ethical, and psychosocial challenges during their courses of recovery and rehabilitation. Although issues encountered in caring for such patients during acute hospitalization have received substantial attention, ethical challenges that may arise in subacute and chronic phases have been underexplored. Shedding light on these issues, this article explores the landscape of normative issues in the course of treating and facilitating access to care for persons with disorders of consciousness during rehabilitation and examines potential implications for patients, clinicians, family members, and society.

Common Data Elements for Disorders of Consciousness: Recommendations from the Working Group on Hospital Course, Confounders, and Medications

The convergence of an interdisciplinary team of neurocritical care specialists to organize the Curing Coma Campaign is the first effort of its kind to coordinate national and international research efforts aimed at a deeper understanding of disorders of consciousness (DoC). This process of understanding includes translational research from bench to bedside, descriptions of systems of care delivery, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, and ethical frameworks. The description and measurement of varying confounding factors related to hospital care was thought to be critical in furthering meaningful research in patients with DoC. Interdisciplinary hospital care is inherently varied across geographical areas as well as community and academic medical centers. Access to monitoring technologies, specialist consultation (medical, nursing, pharmacy, respiratory, and rehabilitation), staffing resources, specialty intensive and acute care units, specialty medications and specific surgical, diagnostic and interventional procedures, and imaging is variable, and the impact on patient outcome in terms of DoC is largely unknown. The heterogeneity of causes in DoC is the source of some expected variability in care and treatment of patients, which necessitated the development of a common nomenclature and set of data elements for meaningful measurement across studies. Guideline adherence in hemorrhagic stroke and severe traumatic brain injury may also be variable due to moderate or low levels of evidence for many recommendations. This article outlines the process of the development of common data elements for hospital course, confounders, and medications to streamline definitions and variables to collect for clinical studies of DoC.

International variability in the diagnosis and management of disorders of consciousness

This manuscript explores the international variability in the diagnosis and management of disorders of consciousness (DoC). The identification, evaluation, intervention, exploration, prognostication and limitation of therapy for patients with DoC is reviewed through an international lens. The myriad factors that impact the diagnosis and management of DoC including 1) financial, 2) legal and regulatory, 3) cultural, 4) religious and 5) psychosocial considerations are discussed. As data comparing patients with DoC internationally are limited, findings from the general critical care or neurocritical care literature are described when information specific to patients with DoC is unavailable. There is a need for improvements in clinical care, education, advocacy and research related to patients with DoC worldwide. It is imperative to standardize methodology to evaluate consciousness and prognosticate outcome. Further, education is needed to 1) generate awareness of the impact of the aforementioned considerations on patients with DoC and 2) develop techniques to optimize communication about DoC with families. It is necessary to promote equity in access to expertise and resources for patients with DoC to enhance the care of patients with DoC worldwide. Improving understanding and management of patients with DoC requires harmonization of existing datasets, development of registries where none exist and establishment of international clinical trial networks that include patients in all phases along the spectrum of care. The work of international organizations like the Curing Coma Campaign can hopefully minimize international variability in the diagnosis and management of DoC and optimize care.