| Reference code: | NDE-58 |
| Location: | Arquivo PCA - Pasta 1/Outros Apoios
|
Title:
| Auditory and somatosensory P3 are complementary for the assessment of patients with disorders of consciousness
|
| Publication year: | 2020
|
URL:
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7602953/
|
| Abstract/Results: | ABSTRACT:
The evaluation of the level of consciousness in patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC) is primarily based on behavioural assessments. Patients with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) do not show any sign of awareness of their environment, while minimally conscious state (MCS) patients show reproducible but fluctuating signs of awareness. Some patients, although with remaining cognitive abilities, are not able to exhibit overt voluntary responses at the bedside and may be misdiagnosed as UWS. Several studies investigated functional neuroimaging and neurophysiology as an additional tool to evaluate the level of consciousness and to detect covert command following in DOC. Most of these studies are based on auditory stimulation, neglecting patients suffering from decreased or absent hearing abilities. In the present study, we aim to assess the response to a P3-based paradigm in 40 patients with DOC and 12 healthy participants using auditory (AEP) and vibrotactile (VTP) stimulation. To this end, an EEG-based brain-computer interface was used at DOC patient’s bedside. We compared the significance of the P3 performance (i.e., the interpretation of significance of the evoked P3 response) as obtained by ‘direct processing’ (i.e., theoretical-based significance threshold) and ‘offline processing’ (i.e., permutation-based single subject level threshold). We evaluated whether the P3 performances were dependent on clinical variables such as diagnosis (UWS and MCS), aetiology and time since injury. Last we tested the dependency of AEP and VTP performances at the single subject level. Direct processing tends to overestimate P3 performance. We did not find any difference in the presence of a P3 performance according to the level of consciousness (UWS vs. MCS) or the aetiology (traumatic vs. non-traumatic brain injury). The performance achieved at the AEP paradigm was independent from what was achieved at the VTP paradigm, indicating that some patients performed better on the AEP task while others performed better on the VTP task. Our results support the importance of using multimodal approaches in the assessment of DOC patients in order to optimise the evaluation of patient’s abilities.
|
| Accessibility: | Document exists in file
|
Language:
| eng
|
Author:
| Annen, J.
|
Secondary author(s):
| Mertel, I., Xu, R., Chatelle, C., Lesenfants, D., Ortner, R., Bonin, E. A. , Guger, C., Laureys, S., Müller, F.
|
Document type:
| Article
|
Number of reproductions:
| 3
|
Reference:
| Annen, J., Mertel, I., Xu, R., Chatelle, C., Lesenfants, D., Ortner, R., Bonin, E. A., Guger, C., Laureys, S., & Müller, F. (2020). Auditory and Somatosensory P3 Are Complementary for the Assessment of Patients with Disorders of Consciousness. Brain Sciences, 10(10):748. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10100748
|
| 2-year Impact Factor: | 3.394|2020
|
| Times cited: | 14|2025-09-20
|
| Indexed document: | Yes
|
| Quartile: | Q3
|
| Keywords: | Multisensory stimulation / P3 / Vibrotactile / Auditory evoked potentials / Disorders of consciousness
|
Auditory and somatosensory P3 are complementary for the assessment of patients with disorders of consciousness |