Tasseau F, Rome J, Cuny E, Emery E
Service de rééducation-post-réanimation, centre médical de L'Argentière, 69610, Aveize, France.
Ann Readapt Med Phys. 2002 Nov;45(8):439-47. doi: 10.1016/s0168-6054(02)00294-5.
The starting point of the French conference of consensus concerning arousal after coma was to answer the following question: "How can we define the ways of going from coma to arousal and their clinical levels?
A team of readers have picked up in the literature one hundred and fifty papers, out of which fifty six have been analysed.
From this analysis, three points emerged: The concepts of coma and arousal; The conditions of evolution from coma to arousal; Various groups of patients depending on their expressing arousal. One could not find any consensual model concerning the different ways of going from coma to arousal. The variability of the technics and the changing validity of all scores did not allow the conditions of arousal to reach a satisfactory level of proof. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is the recognised standard for severe wakefulness' impairment, but it is not sensitive enough while patients' arousing. The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) takes into account the patients' situations far later and does not include situations such as Minimally Conscious States (MCS). That's why we face multiple scores, either ordinal, or categorial, all tending to evaluate the slow levels of arousal.
Clinical findings concerning arousal are to be completed by non-clinical data. This would be greatly helpful to define appropriate management concerning individualized groups of patients. At this stage, another challenge for clinicians is to make the difference between emerging wakefulness and growing conscious activity.
法国昏迷后觉醒共识会议的出发点是回答以下问题:“我们如何定义从昏迷到觉醒的方式及其临床水平?”
一组读者从文献中挑选了150篇论文,其中56篇进行了分析。
通过该分析得出三点:昏迷和觉醒的概念;从昏迷到觉醒的演变条件;根据表达觉醒情况划分的不同患者群体。关于从昏迷到觉醒的不同方式,未找到任何共识模型。技术的可变性以及所有评分不断变化的有效性,使得觉醒条件无法达到令人满意的验证水平。格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)是严重意识障碍的公认标准,但在患者觉醒时不够敏感。格拉斯哥预后量表(GOS)考虑患者情况的时间要晚得多,且不包括最低意识状态(MCS)等情况。这就是为什么我们面临多种评分,既有序数评分,也有分类评分,所有这些评分都倾向于评估觉醒的缓慢水平。
关于觉醒的临床发现需由非临床数据补充。这将非常有助于为不同患者群体确定合适的管理方法。在现阶段,临床医生面临的另一个挑战是区分初现的觉醒和逐渐增强的意识活动。