Nociception Coma Scale with personalized painful stimulation versus standard stimulus in non-communicative patients with disorders of consciousness

Formisano, Rita; Contrada, Marianna; Aloisi, Marta; Ferri, Giulia; Schiattone, Sara; Iosa, Marco; Buzzi, M. G.

doi:10.1080/09602011.2019.1614464

Cited by 25 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study also replicated previous findings of a good correlation between Nociception Coma Scale–Revised and Coma Recovery Scale–Revised total scores 27,28 and an effect of the level of consciousness (i.e. patients with minimally conscious state showing higher scores of Nociception Coma Scale–Revised than unresponsive wakefulness syndrome showing).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

A study of the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised

Wang

Hua

et al. 2020

Clin Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of the study was to check on the reliability and validity of the translated version of Nociception Coma Scale–Revised. Design: Prospective psychometric study. Setting: Rehabilitation and neurology unit in hospital. Subjects: Patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness. Interventions: None. Main measures: The original English version of the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised was translated into Chinese. The reliability and validity were undertaken by trained raters. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used to assess inter-rater reliability and test–retest reliability. Cronbach’s alpha test was used to investigate internal consistency. Spearman’s correlation was used to calculate concurrent validity. The Coma Recovery Scale–revised was used to assess the consciousness of patients. Results: Eighty-four patients were enrolled in the study. Inter-rater reliability of the Chinese version of Nociception Coma Scale–Revised was high for total scores and motor and verbal subscores and good for facial subscores. Test–retest reliability was high for total score and for all subscores. Analysis revealed a moderate internal consistency for subscores. For the concurrent validity, a strong correlation was found between the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised and the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability behavioral scale for all patients. A moderate correlation was found between the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised and the Coma Recovery Scale–revised scores for all patients. Conclusion: The Chinese version of Nociception Coma Scale–Revised has good reliability and validity data for assessing responses to pain in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

A study of the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised

Wang

Hua

et al. 2020

Clin Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…No eligible studies were found (i.e. studies comparing the NCS‐R with other scales in terms of number of patients detected with pain), although some studies from different centers and countries indicate that the scale may be appropriate for detecting signs of potentially painful condition in DoC .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

European Academy of Neurology guideline on the diagnosis of coma and other disorders of consciousness

Kondziella

Bender

Diserens

et al. 2020

Euro J of Neurology

Self Cite

485

392

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Misdiagnosis is one of the major concerns in Disorders of Consciousness (DoC). 1 Confounding factors in the behavioral evaluation of overt responsiveness include comorbidities, 2 extreme motor deficits and severe spasticity, 3 diffuse pain, 4 neuropsychological deficits, such as aphasia, 5 psychomotor agitation, 6 oppositive attitudes, and inertia, such as in akinetic mutism, 7 as well as iatrogenic effects (anti-epileptics, sedative drugs, anti-spastic agents, etc. ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Coma Recovery Scale-Revised With and Without the Emotional Stimulation of Caregivers

Formisano

Contrada

Iosa

et al. 2019

Can. J. Neurol. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) is the gold standard of responsiveness assessment in patients with disorder of consciousness. The purpose of this study is to search for the efficacy of the caregivers’ involvement in the evaluation of responsiveness in these patients. Responsiveness assessment was performed in 15 patients with CRS-R. The CRS-R was administered with and without the emotional stimulation of the primary caregiver at different times. Our preliminary findings seem to suggest that, including also the caregivers during CRS-R assessment, may obtain better responsiveness scoring than that obtained by professionals and might reduce the misdiagnosis rate.

show abstract

Nociception Coma Scale with personalized painful stimulation versus standard stimulus in non-communicative patients with disorders of consciousness

Cited by 25 publications

References 44 publications

A study of the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised

A study of the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised

European Academy of Neurology guideline on the diagnosis of coma and other disorders of consciousness

Coma Recovery Scale-Revised With and Without the Emotional Stimulation of Caregivers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About