Abstract:The purpose of this study was to differentiate clinically meaningful improvement or deterioration from normal fluctuations in patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) following severe brain injury. We computed indices of responsiveness for the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) using data from a clinical trial of 180 participants with DoC. We used CRS-R scores from baseline (enrollment in a clinical trial) and a 4-week follow-up assessment period for these calculations. To improve precision, we transformed ordinal CRS-R total scores (0-23 points) to equal-interval measures on a 0-100 unit scale using Rasch Measurement theory. Using the 0-100 unit total Rasch measures, we calculated distribution-based 0.5 standard deviation (SD) minimal clinically important difference, minimal detectable change using 95% confidence intervals, and conditional minimal detectable change using 95% confidence intervals. The distribution-based minimal clinically important difference evaluates group-level changes, whereas the minimal detectable change values evaluate individual-level changes. The minimal clinically important difference and minimal detectable change are derived using the overall variability across total measures at baseline and 4 weeks. The conditional minimal detectable change is generated for each possible pair of CRS-R Rasch person measures and accounts for variation in standard error across the scale. We applied these indices to determine the proportions of participants who made a change beyond measurement error within each of the two subgroups, based on treatment arm (amantadine hydrochloride or placebo) or categorization of baseline Rasch person measure to states of consciousness (i.e., unresponsive wakefulness syndrome and minimally conscious state). We compared the proportion of participants in each treatment arm who made a change according to the minimal detectable change and determined whether they also changed to another state of consciousness. CRS-R indices of responsiveness (using the 0-100 transformed scale) were as follows: 0.5SD minimal clinically important difference = 9 units, minimal detectable change = 11 units, and the conditional minimal detectable change ranged from 11 to 42 units. For the amantadine and placebo groups, 70% and 58% of participants showed change beyond measurement error using the minimal detectable change, respectively. For the unresponsive wakefulness syndrome and minimally conscious state groups, 54% and 69% of participants changed beyond measurement error using the minimal detectable change, respectively. Among 115 participants (64% of the total sample) who made a change beyond measurement error, 29 participants (25%) did not change state of consciousness. CRS-R indices of responsiveness can support clinicians and researchers in discerning when behavioral changes in patients with DoC exceed measurement error. Notably, the minimal detectable change can support the detection of patients who make a "true" change within or across states of consciousness. Our findings highlight that the continued use of ordinal scores may result in incorrect inferences about the degree and relevance of a change score.

Coma recovery scale-r: variability in the disorder of consciousness

Coma recovery scale-r: variability in the disorder of consciousness

Validation of the Chinese version of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R).

Evaluation of the consciousness scales in the diagnosis of the severely impaired consciousness

Metabolic Abnormalities in Patients with Chronic Disorders of Consciousness.

Spontaneous Recovery from Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome to a Minimally Conscious State: Early Structural Changes Revealed by 7-T Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Cortical responses to auditory stimulation predict the prognosis of patients with disorders of consciousness

Behavioral scales variability in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness

Interpreting Change in Disorders of Consciousness Using the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised

A Brief Overview of the Coma Recovery Scale–Revised: Updates From the COMBI

Which information derived from the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised provides the most reliable prediction of clinical diagnosis and recovery of consciousness? A comparative study using machine learning techniques

Chinese Translation of the Coma Recovery Scale—Revised

A new ICT system coupling electromyography and coma recovery scale-revised to support the diagnostic process in disorders of consciousness

Score on Coma Recovery Scale-Revised at admission predicts outcome at discharge in intensive rehabilitation after severe brain injury

Coma recovery scale: Key clinical tool ignored enough in disorders of consciousness

Heart rate variability for the evaluation of patients with disorders of consciousness

Outcome prediction in disorders of consciousness: the role of coma recovery scale revised

Measure functional network and cortical excitability in post-anoxic patients with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome diagnosed by behavioral scales

Variability of large timescale functional networks in patients with disorders of consciousness

Feasibility and Validity of the Coma Recovery Scale‐Revised For Accelerated Standardized Testing: A practical assessment tool for detecting consciousness in the intensive care unit

Detecting early recovery of consciousness: a comparison of methods