PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to explore the concurrent validity, inter-rater agreement and diagnostic sensitivity of a French adaptation of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) as compared to other coma scales such as the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness scale (FOUR) and the Wessex Head Injury Matrix (WHIM). RESEARCH DESIGN: Multi-centric prospective study. METHOD AND PROCEDURES: To test concurrent validity and diagnostic sensitivity, the four behavioural scales were administered in a randomized order in 77 vegetative and minimally conscious patients. Twenty-four clinicians with different professional backgrounds, levels of expertise and CRS-R experience were recruited to assess inter-rater agreement. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Good concurrent validity was obtained between the CRS-R and the three other standardized behavioural scales. Inter-rater reliability for the CRS-R total score and sub-scores was good, indicating that the scale yields reproducible findings across examiners and does not appear to be systematically biased by profession, level of expertise or CRS-R experience. Finally, the CRS-R demonstrated a significantly higher sensitivity to detect MCS patients, as compared to the GCS, the FOUR and the WHIM. CONCLUSION: The results show that the French version of the CRS-R is a valid and sensitive scale which can be used in severely brain damaged patients by all members of the medical staff.
RCT Entities:
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to explore the concurrent validity, inter-rater agreement and diagnostic sensitivity of a French adaptation of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) as compared to other coma scales such as the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness scale (FOUR) and the Wessex Head Injury Matrix (WHIM). RESEARCH DESIGN: Multi-centric prospective study. METHOD AND PROCEDURES: To test concurrent validity and diagnostic sensitivity, the four behavioural scales were administered in a randomized order in 77 vegetative and minimally conscious patients. Twenty-four clinicians with different professional backgrounds, levels of expertise and CRS-R experience were recruited to assess inter-rater agreement. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Good concurrent validity was obtained between the CRS-R and the three other standardized behavioural scales. Inter-rater reliability for the CRS-R total score and sub-scores was good, indicating that the scale yields reproducible findings across examiners and does not appear to be systematically biased by profession, level of expertise or CRS-R experience. Finally, the CRS-R demonstrated a significantly higher sensitivity to detect MCSpatients, as compared to the GCS, the FOUR and the WHIM. CONCLUSION: The results show that the French version of the CRS-R is a valid and sensitive scale which can be used in severely brain damaged patients by all members of the medical staff.
Authors: Barbara Schorr; Winfried Schlee; Marion Arndt; Dorothée Lulé; Iris-Tatjana Kolassa; Alex Lopez-Rolon; Alexander Lopez-Rolon; Andreas Bender Journal: J Neurol Date: 2014-11-09 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Charlène Aubinet; Stephen Karl Larroque; Lizette Heine; Charlotte Martial; Steve Majerus; Steven Laureys; Carol Di Perri Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2018-07-04 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Camille Chatelle; Yelena G Bodien; Cecilia Carlowicz; Sarah Wannez; Vanessa Charland-Verville; Olivia Gosseries; Steven Laureys; Ron T Seel; Joseph T Giacino Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2016-03-02 Impact factor: 3.966