BackgroundSome patients awaken from coma (that is, open the eyes) but remain unresponsive (that is, only showing reflex movements without response to command). This syndrome has been coined vegetative state. We here present a new name for this challenging neurological condition: unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (abbreviated UWS).DiscussionMany clinicians feel uncomfortable when referring to patients as vegetative. Indeed, to most of the lay public and media vegetative state has a pejorative connotation and seems inappropriately to refer to these patients as being vegetable-like. Some political and religious groups have hence felt the need to emphasize these vulnerable patients' rights as human beings. Moreover, since its first description over 35 years ago, an increasing number of functional neuroimaging and cognitive evoked potential studies have shown that physicians should be cautious to make strong claims about awareness in some patients without behavioral responses to command. Given these concerns regarding the negative associations intrinsic to the term vegetative state as well as the diagnostic errors and their potential effect on the treatment and care for these patients (who sometimes never recover behavioral signs of consciousness but often recover to what was recently coined a minimally conscious state) we here propose to replace the name.ConclusionSince after 35 years the medical community has been unsuccessful in changing the pejorative image associated with the words vegetative state, we think it would be better to change the term itself. We here offer physicians the possibility to refer to this condition as unresponsive wakefulness syndrome or UWS. As this neutral descriptive term indicates, it refers to patients showing a number of clinical signs (hence syndrome) of unresponsiveness (that is, without response to commands) in the presence of wakefulness (that is, eye opening).

A syndrome of paroxysmal, episodic sympathetic hyperactivity after acquired brain injury has been recognized for almost 60 years. This project sought to simplify the confused nomenclature for the condition (>31 eponyms) and simplify the nine overlapping sets of diagnostic criteria. A consensus-developed questionnaire based on a systematic review of the literature was circulated to a widely representative, international expert group utilizing a Delphi approach. Diagnostic criteria were dropped if group consensus failed to agree on their relative importance, with a goal of reaching a Cronbach α of 0.8 (suitable for research purposes). The resulting criteria were combined into an assessment measure for clinical and research settings. The consensus group recommend that the term "paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity" replace previous terms to describe the "syndrome, recognised in a subgroup of survivors of severe acquired brain injury, of simultaneous, paroxysmal transient increases in sympathetic [elevated heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, temperature, sweating] and motor [posturing] activity." An 11 point probabilistic diagnostic scale was developed with reference to published criteria, yielding an acceptable Cronbach α of 0.8. These 11 items were proceduralized and combined with a symptom severity index to produce a diagnostic tool for use with adults (the paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity assessment measure [PSH-AM]). Development of a pediatric version of the scale and further research into the validity of the PSH-AM is recommended. The consensus position builds on previous literature to establish diagnostic definitions and criteria, an important move to standardize research and management of this condition.

No abstract

BackgroundDespite evidence from neuroimaging research, diagnosis and early prognosis in the vegetative (VS/UWS) and minimally conscious (MCS) states still depend on the observation of clinical signs of responsiveness. Multiple testing has documented a systematic variability during the day in the incidence of established signs of responsiveness. Spontaneous fluctuations of the Coma Recovery Scale-revised (CRS-r) scores are conceivable.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the CRS-r repeatedly administered to 7 VS/UWS and 12 MCS subjects undergoing systematic observation during a conventional 13 weeks. rehabilitation plan.ResultsThe CRS-r global, visual and auditory scores were found higher in the morning than at the afternoon administration in both VS/UWS and MCS subgroups over the entire period of observation. The probability for a VS/UWS subject of being classified as MCS at the morning testing at least once during the 13 weeks. observation was as high as 30 %, i.e., compatible with the reported misdiagnosis rate between the two clinical conditions.ConclusionsMultiple CRS-r testing is advisable to minimize the risk of misclassification; estimates of spontaneous variability could be used to characterize with greater accuracy patients with disorder of consciousness and possibly help optimize the rehabilitation plan.