Medicolegal issues and disorders of consciousness.

BACKGROUND: The tasks and responsibilities that come with clinician involvement in medicolegal proceedings can be daunting and particularly so in challenging areas such as provision of medicolegal opinions in cases involving disorders of consciousness (DoC). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this narrative review was to provide education and advice to healthcare practitioners who by choice or circumstance are asked and/or required to provide medicolegal opinions in cases involving patients with DoC. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed Central and MedlinePlus for articles dealing with clinician involvement in medicolegal cases involving persons with DoC. The information provided also integrates the authors' nearly 40 years of clinical experience, brain injury medicine practice and "trials and tribulations" associated with medicolegal involvement in such cases. RESULTS: The literature was found to be replete with articles on brain death and withdrawal/withholding of care (which are not the focus of this review). The extant medical literature in brain injury medicine on the other hand is currently lacking in practical information for clinicians working "in the trenches" regarding the challenges and caveats of medicolegal involvement in such cases. CONCLUSION: This review provides the reader with a big picture overview of the most pertinent medicolegal topics inherent in clinical work with patients with DOC including pertinent nomenclature, caveats regarding forensic consultation including independent medical examinations, testimony tips, discussion of life expectancy/median survival concepts, prognostication in a medicolegal context, documentation and record keeping as well as some of the specific challenges pertinent to these types of brain injury cases that are not per se relevant in less severe injuries.

The American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine Diagnostic Criteria for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury.

OBJECTIVE: To develop new diagnostic criteria for mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) that are appropriate for use across the lifespan and in sports, civilian trauma, and military settings. DESIGN: Rapid evidence reviews on 12 clinical questions and Delphi method for expert consensus. PARTICIPANTS: The Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Task Force of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine Brain Injury Special Interest Group convened a Working Group of 17 members and an external interdisciplinary expert panel of 32 clinician-scientists. Public stakeholder feedback was analyzed from 68 individuals and 23 organizations. RESULTS: The first 2 Delphi votes asked the expert panel to rate their agreement with both the diagnostic criteria for mild TBI and the supporting evidence statements. In the first round, 10 of 12 evidence statements reached consensus agreement. Revised evidence statements underwent a second round of expert panel voting, where consensus was achieved for all. For the diagnostic criteria, the final agreement rate, after the third vote, was 90.7%. Public stakeholder feedback was incorporated into the diagnostic criteria revision prior to the third expert panel vote. A terminology question was added to the third round of Delphi voting, where 30 of 32 (93.8%) expert panel members agreed that 'the diagnostic label 'concussion' may be used interchangeably with 'mild TBI' when neuroimaging is normal or not clinically indicated.' CONCLUSIONS: New diagnostic criteria for mild TBI were developed through an evidence review and expert consensus process. Having unified diagnostic criteria for mild TBI can improve the quality and consistency of mild TBI research and clinical care.

Comparison of veterans affairs and NIDILRR traumatic brain injury model systems participants with disorders of consciousness.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize demographic, pre-injury, and outcome data within the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR) and Veterans Affairs (VA) Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems (TBIMS) cohorts with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) with no command-following ability at time of admission to acute rehabilitation. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: NIDILRR and VA TBI Model Systems (TBIMS) centers. PARTICIPANTS: 396 NIDILRR and 72 VA participants without command-following ability who experienced TBI with subsequent Disorder of Consciousness (DoC). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Pre-injury and injury characteristics, rehabilitation outcomes, and 1-year self-reported outcomes. RESULTS: VA TBIMS cohort included individuals who were active duty or had military service before their injury. The VA cohort were more likely to be re-hospitalized at 1-year follow-up or residing in a long-term care or rehab setting. The NIDILRR TBIMS cohort had higher FIM and DRS scores at rehabilitation discharge, while the VA participants saw longer lengths of stay and higher numbers of "violent" injury types. CONCLUSIONS: This study allows for a better understanding of the comparability between VA and NIDILRR DoC cohorts providing guidance on how veteran and civilian samples might be merged in future TBIMS studies to explore predictors of recovery from a DoC.

Pain in Persons with Disorders of Consciousness.

Pain and suffering in persons with disorders of consciousness (DoC) remain poorly understood, frequently unaddressed or inadequately addressed, and controversial on numerous levels. This narrative literature review will address a number of critical issues germane to pain and suffering in this challenging group of patients, providing an introductory overview of the topic, perspectives on current knowledge regarding pain pathoanatomy and pathophysiology, and a review of common pain generators and factors that can lead to the chronifcation of pain. Caveats on bedside pain assessment challenges, as well as electrophysiologic and neuroimaging findings in these patients, will also be explored. Pain management techniques, including non-pharmacological and pharmacological, will be reviewed. Ethical considerations in the context of pain and suffering in persons with disorders of consciousness will round out the review prior to our concluding comments.

Assessing the Severity of Traumatic Brain Injury-Time for a Change?

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been described to be man's most complex disease, in man's most complex organ. Despite this vast complexity, variability, and individuality, we still classify the severity of TBI based on non-specific, often unreliable, and pathophysiologically poorly understood measures. Current classifications are primarily based on clinical evaluations, which are non-specific and poorly predictive of long-term disability. Brain imaging results have also been used, yet there are multiple ways of doing brain imaging, at different timepoints in this very dynamic injury. Severity itself is a vague concept. All prediction models based on combining variables that can be assessed during the acute phase have reached only modest predictive values for later outcome. Yet, these early labels of severity often determine how the patient is treated by the healthcare system at large. This opinion paper examines the problems and provides caveats regarding the use of current severity labels and the many practical and scientific issues that arise from doing so. The objective of this paper is to show the causes and consequences of current practice and propose a new approach based on risk classification. A new approach based on multimodal quantifiable data (including imaging and biomarkers) and risk-labels would be of benefit both for the patients and for TBI clinical research and should be a priority for international efforts in the field.

Functional Change from Five to Fifteen Years after Traumatic Brain Injury.

Few studies have assessed the long-term functional outcomes of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in large, well-characterized samples. Using the Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems cohort, this study assessed the maintenance of independence between years 5 and 15 post-injury and risk factors for decline. The study sample included 1381 persons with TBI who received inpatient rehabilitation, survived to 15 years post-injury, and were available for data collection at 5 or 10 years and 15 years post-injury. The Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and Disability Rating Scale (DRS) were used to measure functional outcomes. The majority of participants had no changes during the 10-year time frame. For FIM, only 4.4% showed decline in Self-Care, 4.9% declined in Mobility, and 5.9% declined in Cognition. Overall, 10.4% showed decline in one or more FIM subscales. Decline was detected by DRS Level of Function (24% with >1-point change) and Employability (6% with >1-point change). Predictors of decline factors across all measures were age >25 years and, across most measures, having less than or equal to a high school education. Additional predictors of FIM decline included male sex (FIM Mobility and Self-Care) and longer rehabilitation length of stay (FIM Mobility and Cognition). In contrast to studies reporting change in the first 5 years post-TBI inpatient rehabilitation, a majority of those who survive to 15 years do not experience functional decline. Aging and cognitive reserve appear to be more important drivers of loss of function than original severity of the injury. Interventions to identify those at risk for decline may be needed to maintain or enhance functional status as persons age with a TBI.

Disorders of consciousness terminology: history, evolution and future directions.

There has been a significant evolution of nomenclature with regards to classification of persons with disorders of consciousness (DoC) over the last 100 years. This paper provides a review of the evolution of this terminology with discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of historical and current terms. Recommendations for how this evolution should continue moving forward in the best interest of patients, their families, society, clinical care, and research will also be addressed. The taxonomy we choose, hopefully by international consensus, has multifaceted implications that go well beyond just a debate on nomenclature.

Validity Assessment in Traumatic Brain Injury Impairment and Disability Evaluations.

This article provides an overview of validity assessment in persons with traumatic brain injury including evaluation caveats. Specific discussion is provided on post-concussive disorders, malingering, examination techniques to assess for validity, response bias, effort and non-organic/functional presentations. Examinee and examiner biases issues will also be explored. Discussion is also provided regarding judicial trends in limiting examiner scope of testing and/or testimony, and risk of liability when providing expert witness opinions on validity of examinee presentations. The hope is to encourage physiatrists to become more aware and skilled in validity assessment given its importance in differential diagnosis of impairment following traumatic brain injury.

Employment Stability in the First 5 Years After Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize employment stability and identify predictive factors of employment stability in working-age individuals after moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) that may be clinically addressed. DESIGN: Longitudinal observational study of an inception cohort from the Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems National Database (TBIMS-NDB) using data at years 1, 2, and 5 post-TBI. SETTING: Inpatient rehabilitation centers with telephone follow-up. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals enrolled in the TBIMS-NDB since 2001, aged 18-59, with employment data at 2 or more follow-up interviews at years 1, 2, and 5 (N=5683). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Employment stability, categorized using post-TBI employment data as no paid employment (53.25%), stably (27.20%), delayed (10.24%), or unstably (9.31%) employed. RESULTS: Multinomial regression analyses identified predictive factors of employment stability, including younger age, white race, less severe injuries, preinjury employment, higher annual earnings, male sex, higher education, transportation independence postinjury, and no anxiety or depression at 1 year post-TBI. CONCLUSIONS: Employment stability serves as an important measure of productivity post-TBI. Psychosocial, clinical, environmental, and demographic factors predict employment stability post-TBI. Notable predictors include transportation independence as well as the presence of anxiety and depression at year 1 post-TBI as potentially modifiable intervention targets.

Changing the culture of neurodisability through language and sensitivity of providers: Creating a safe place for LGBTQIA+ people.

BACKGROUND: There is an increasing interest in sexual and gender diversity in neurorehabilitation. Healthcare professionals wanting to improve their practice know the importance of understanding the needs and expectations of specific communities. OBJECTIVE: To critically review the literature about neurological disorders in people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual, and people with other sexual orientations and forms of gender expression (LGBTQIA+). METHODS: Systematic search in electronic databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science) and identification of relevant studies. RESULTS: Quantitative and qualitative findings are summarized and reported by neurological disorders: a) neurodisability/epilepsy (17.7%), b) intellectual disability/autism spectrum disorders (19.6%), c) dementia/HIV-related dementia (39.2%), d) spinal cord injury (7.8%), and e) traumatic brain injury/stroke (15.7%). CONCLUSIONS: LGBTQIA+ people with neurodisabilities and their partners/families of choice can conceal their sexual orientation or gender identity for fear of diminished quality of care. Their invisibility translates into health disparities, lack of policies and services that meet their unique needs. Dementia is the most common neurodisability documented in LGBTQIA+ people. We provide recommendations to increase LGBTQIA+ cultural competency for clinical practice, research, and policy to help different stakeholders to promote a positive change in the culture of neurodisability.

Medicolegal Issues in Traumatic Brain Injury.

The role of the physiatrist in provision of medicolegal expert testimony in cases involving traumatic brain injury is challenging and complex. This article provides an overview of how such work should be conducted from a practical perspective including discussion of ethical, legal, medical, and business aspects of such activities. Additionally, pointers are provided with regards to how information including preinjury, injury, and postinjury (including neuroimaging and neuropsychological data) should be considered and integrated into medicolegal opinions and testimony.

Risk Factors for Institutionalization After Traumatic Brain Injury Inpatient Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: To create a profile of individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) who received inpatient rehabilitation and were discharged to an institutional setting using characteristics measured at rehabilitation discharge. METHODS: The Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems National Database is a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal database for people with moderate to severe TBI. We analyzed data for participants enrolled from January 2002 to June 2012 who had lived in a private residence before TBI. This cross-sectional study used logistic regression analyses to identify sociodemographic factors, lengths of stay, and cognitive and physical functioning levels that differentiated patients discharged to institutional versus private settings. RESULTS: Older age, living alone before TBI, and lower levels of function at rehabilitation discharge (independence in locomotion, bladder management, comprehension, and social interaction) were significantly associated with higher institutionalization rates and provided the best models identifying factors associated with institutionalization. Institutionalization was also associated with decreased independence in bed-chair-wheelchair transfers and increased duration of posttraumatic amnesia. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals institutionalized after inpatient rehabilitation for TBI were older, lived alone before injury, had longer posttraumatic amnesia durations, and were less independent in specific functional characteristics. Research evaluating the effect of increasing postdischarge support and improving treatment effectiveness in these functional areas is recommended.

A biopsychosocial analysis of sexuality in adult males and their partners after severe traumatic brain injury.

PURPOSE: The primary aim of this study was to investigate changes in sexual function in males and their partners following severe TBI. Secondary aims of the study were to explore the relationship between selected sociodemographic, emotional/behavioural and sexual function variables. METHODS: Twenty males with a history of severe TBI and 20 healthy controls (HC) and their respective partners were recruited. Sexual life was assessed with the Sexuality Evaluation Schedule Assessment Monitoring (SESAMO). Study participant level of self-awareness was evaluated by the Awareness Questionnaire, whereas their neuropsychiatric and psychopathological statuses were assessed by the NPI, the HAM-D and STAI. RESULTS: A reduction in desire and frequency of sexual intercourse was found in all survivors and their partners. Moreover, higher levels of survivor depression correlated with lower partner harmony. Survivor feelings toward their partners gradually decreased over time, as did the ability to make decisions as a couple. The comparison with HC couples revealed that both survivors' and their partners' exaggerated the extent of disease. CONCLUSIONS: After male severe TBI, men appear to have a reduced quality of their sexual life, which may be more a result of relationship dysfunction than a sexual performance deficit related to their brain injury history.

Validity assessment and the neurological physical examination.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of any patient or examinee with neurological impairment, whether acquired or congenital, provides a key set of data points in the context of developing accurate diagnostic impressions and implementing an appropriate neurorehabilitation program. As part of that assessment, the neurological physical exam is an extremely important component of the overall neurological assessment. PURPOSE: In the aforementioned context, clinicians often are confounded by unusual, atypical or unexplainable physical exam findings that bring into question the organicity, veracity, and/or underlying cause of the observed clinical presentation. The purpose of this review is to provide readers with general directions and specific caveats regarding validity assessment in the context of the neurological physical exam. CONCLUSIONS: It is of utmost importance for health care practitioners to be aware of assessment methodologies that may assist in determining the validity of the neurological physical exam and differentiating organic from non-organic/functional impairments. Maybe more importantly, the limitations of many commonly used strategies for assessment of non-organicity should be recognized and consider prior to labeling observed physical findings on neurological exam as non-organic or functional.