An observational study in Disorder of Consciousness, sponsored by Hospitales Nisa. Completed at 2 sites in Spain. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-07-20.
Sponsored by Hospitales Nisa · Observational
The goal of this observational retrospective study is to investigate and compare the clinical evolution of a sample of patients with the diagnosis of MCS+ versus MCS- according to the CRS-R. The main questions it aims to answer are the presence of differences in the likelihood of emergence from the MCS (EMCS) between these two groups and in the progress of disability and functional independence after the EMCS.
Severe acquired brain injuries can be caused by traumatic brain injury, stroke or anoxia, among others and can lead to Disorders of Consciousness (DOC), an umbrella term that encompasses a wide range of different clinical conditions such as coma, the Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome (UWS) and the Minimally Conscious State (MCS). Coma usually lasts from a few days to few weeks and it is defined as a state of profound unawareness from which the patient cannot be aroused; eyes are closed, and a normal sleep-wake cycle is absent. The UWS denotes a condition of wakefulness without (clinical signs of) awareness; UWS patients may open their eyes but exhibit only reflex (i.e. non-intentional) behaviors and are therefore considered unaware of themselves and their surroundings. On the other hand, the MCS denotes a condition where discernible behavioral evidence of consciousness is retained. More recently, given the heterogeneity of the MCS category, patients showing higher level responses, including reproducible movements to commands, intelligible verbalization and intentional communication (i.e. MCS+), have been distinguished from those showing lower level non-reflex responses (e.g. visual pursuit, object recognition; i.e. MCS-). Once patients recovery the ability to communicate or to use objects they are considered emerged from the MCS (EMCS).
Currently, the gold standard for the behavioural assessment of DOC patients is the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) and the diagnosis is made according to the presence of certain behaviours. However, because of daily fluctuations, a minimum of 5 CRS-R evaluations within a short time interval are recommended, allowing to reduce the risk of misdiagnose to the 40%.
If the CRS-R criteria for the diagnosis of coma and UWS are somehow clear, the MCS and EMCS entities are the focus of a growing body of research. Despite all, the diagnostic criteria for DOC patients are becoming clearer and clearer, but markers to predict prognosis and functional outcome need to be better studied. Knowing the natural history of patients with DOC may help to an adequate prognosis, that is important not only for the patient and the family but also for treatment planning and provision of therapies and discharge. In particular, if there are existing studies about the prognosis of UWS and MCS patients, studies comparing MCS- and MCS+ patients are lacking. State of the art about the prognosis in DOC patients highlight a better outcome for patients in a MCS compared to patients in UWS, but little is known about a possible different prognosis between MCS+ and MCS- patients. A recent study stresses the need for prospective studies investigating differences in long-term functional outcome between patients in a MCS+ and MCS-. So far, the only available longitudinal study including MCS- and MCS+ patients followed 39 chronic DOC patient for two years after brain injury and assessed them with the CRS-R every 3 months. The sample included 16 patients in a UWS, 15 patients in a MCS-, 7 in a MCS+ and 1 in a EMCS and the authors did not find differences in the prognosis between MCS- and MCS+ patients, probably due to limited sample size.
Therefore, the first aim of this study is to investigate and compare the clinical evolution of a sample of patients with the diagnosis of MCS+ versus MCS- according to the CRS-R total score. In particular, the investigators focus our attention on the likelihood of emergence from the MCS and on the evolution of functional independence after the emergence from the MCS. The investigators hypothesize that those patients presenting preferentially complex behavioural responses will have better clinical trajectories including an increasing likelihood to emerge form MCS and a better functional outcome once emerged from the MCS.
290 studies on the registry are indexed under Consciousness Disorders; 109 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 80 is close to the median of 79 across 95 observational studies indexed under Consciousness Disorders.
Browse Consciousness Disorders studies →Hospitales Nisa is the lead sponsor of 9 studies on the registry; 1 is open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Data of patients with DOC who had attended an inpatient neurorehabilitation program between January 2004 and December 2022 in all facilities of the hospital network.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients diagnosed as in a Minimally Conscious State "Plus" and "Minus"
Behavioral: Rehabilitation
Physical therapy and multisensory stimulation adjusted to the needs of each patient.
Baseline clinical state
Defined by the clinical state (Unresposive Wakefulness Syndrome, Minimally Conscious State, Emergence from Minimally Conscious State).
Time frame: At admission to the rehabilitation hospital
Baseline neurobehavioral condition
Defined by the score in the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R). The CRS-R consists of 29 hierarchically organised items divided into 6 subscales addressing auditory, visual, motor, oromotor, communication, and arousal processes.
Time frame: At admission to the rehabilitation hospital
Baseline disability
Defined by scores in the Disability Rating Scale (DRS). The DRS is an 8-item scale that address the three original World Health Organization categories of impairment, disability and handicap. Scores obtained from the Disability Rating Scale can be interpreted as indicators of various levels of disability, including no disability (score of 0), mild (1), partial (2-3), moderate (4-6), moderately severe (7-11), severe (12-16), extremely severe (17-21), vegetative state (22-24), and extreme vegetative state (25-29).
Time frame: At the admission to the rehabilitation hospital
Progress in the clinical state
Defined by the clinical state (Unresposive Wakefulness Syndrome, Minimally Conscious State, Emergence from Minimally Conscious State).
Time frame: Weekly assessments from admission to the rehabilitation hospital to discharge, demise, or emergence from MCS, up to 36 months
Progress in the neurobehavioral condition
Defined by the score in the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R). The CRS-R consists of 29 hierarchically organised items divided into 6 subscales addressing auditory, visual, motor, oromotor, communication, and arousal processes.
Time frame: Weekly assessments from admission to the rehabilitation hospital to discharge, demise, or emergence from MCS, up to 36 months
Progress in disability
Defined by scores in the Disability Rating Scale (DRS). The DRS is an 8-item scale that address the three original World Health Organization categories of impairment, disability and handicap. Scores obtained from the Disability Rating Scale can be interpreted as indicators of various levels of disability, including no disability (score of 0), mild (1), partial (2-3), moderate (4-6), moderately severe (7-11), severe (12-16), extremely severe (17-21), vegetative state (22-24), and extreme vegetative state (25-29).
Time frame: Monthly assessments from admission to the rehabilitation hospital to discharge, demise, or emergence from MCS, up to 36 months
Follow-up disability
Defined by scores in the Disability Rating Scale (DRS). The DRS is an 8-item scale that address the three original World Health Organization categories of impairment, disability and handicap. Scores obtained from the Disability Rating Scale can be interpreted as indicators of various levels of disability, including no disability (score of 0), mild (1), partial (2-3), moderate (4-6), moderately severe (7-11), severe (12-16), extremely severe (17-21), vegetative state (22-24), and extreme vegetative state (25-29).
Time frame: At 6 months after emergence from MCS
Follow-up independence in activities of daily living
Defined by scores in the Barthel Index (BI). The BI measures the degree of assistance required by an individual on 10 items of mobility and self care. The scores in the BI can be interpreted as indicators of dependence, such as total dependence (scores below 21), severe dependence (21-60), moderate dependence (61-90), and slight dependence (scores above 90).
Time frame: At 6 months after emergence from MCS
Follow-up functional Independence
Defined by scores in the Functional Independence Measure (FIM). The FIM is a 18-item that measures independence for self-care, including sphincter control, transfers, locomotion, communication, and social cognition. The total score of the FIM can be interpreted as a general measure of functional independence and also as stages of functional independence within activities of daily living, sphincter management, mobility, and executive function.
Time frame: At 6 months after emergence from MCS
Ran from Sep 2004 to primary completion in Feb 2023, 220 months.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Hospitales Nisa