The aim of this study was to analyze the Chinese version of the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness within the framework of Rasch modeling, including investigating the invariance of total scores across different etiologies of disorders of consciousness.
Design
Prospective psychometric study.
Participants
Patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness from the Rehabilitation and Neurology units in hospital.
Interventions
None.
Main Outcome Measure
The Nociception Coma Scale–Revised was undertaken by trained raters and the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised was used to assess patients’ consciousness. The psychometric properties within the Rasch model including item-person targeting, reliability and separation, item fit, unidimensionality, and differential item functioning were assessed.
Results
84 patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness (mean age 53 years; mean injury 5 months; 42 with Minimally Conscious State and 42 with Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome) of 252 observations were enrolled in the study. Through the procedure of repeated assessment and differential item function, a lower item bias Rasch set was purified. The Rasch model assumptions were examined and met, with item reliability and validity meeting the recommended threshold.
Conclusions
The Chinese version of the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised demonstrated unidimensionality, good reliability and separation, and good item fit, but dissatisfied person fit and item-person targeting. The verbal subscale showed a notable discrepancy between person responses and the difficulty of the items, suggesting limited clinical significance.
WangJDiHHuaW, et al.A study of the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised. Clin Rehabil2020; 34: 1112–1121.
2.
AshwalSCranfordRBernatJ. The Multi-Society Task Force on PVS. Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state. N Engl J Med1994; 330: 1499–1508.
3.
LaureysSCelesiaGGCohadonF, et al.Unresponsive wakefulness syndrome: a new name for the vegetative state or apallic syndrome. BMC Med2010; 8: –4.
4.
GiacinoJTAshwalSChildsN, et al.The minimally conscious state: definition and diagnostic criteria. Neurology2002; 58: 349–353.
5.
SchnakersCZaslerND. Pain assessment and management in disorders of consciousness. Curr Opin Neurol2007; 20: 620–626.
6.
ChatelleCVanhaudenhuyseAMergamA, et al.Pain assessment in non-communicative patients. Revue Médicale de Liège2008; 63: 429–437.
7.
SchnakersCChatelleCVanhaudenhuyseA, et al.The Nociception Coma Scale: a new tool to assess nociception in disorders of consciousness. Pain2010; 148: 215–219.
8.
VinkPEskesAMLindeboomR, et al.Nurses assessing pain with the Nociception Coma Scale: interrater reliability and validity. Pain Manag Nurs2014; 15: 881–887.
9.
RiganelloFCorteseMArcuriF, et al.A study of the reliability of the Nociception Coma Scale. Clin Rehabil2015; 29: 388–393.
10.
SattinDSchnakersCPaganiM, et al.Evidence of altered pressure pain thresholds in persons with disorders of consciousness as measured by the Nociception Coma Scale–Italian version. Neuropsychol Rehabil2018; 28: 1295–1310.
11.
LinacreJM. A user's guide to WINSTEPS® MINISTEP: Rasch-model computer programs. Beaverton, OR: Winsteps, 2016, p.719.
La PortaFCaselliSIanesAB, et al.Can we scientifically and reliably measure the level of consciousness in vegetative and minimally conscious states? Rasch analysis of the coma recovery scale-revised. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2013; 94: 527–535. e521.
16.
La PortaFFranceschiniMCaselliS, et al.Unified Balance Scale: an activity-based, bed to community, and aetiology-independent measure of balance calibrated with Rasch analysis. J Rehabil Med2011; 43: 435–444.
17.
TennantAPallantJ. DIF Matters: a practical approach to test if differential item functioning makes a difference. Rasch Measurement Transactions2007; 20: 1082–1084.
18.
ReeveBBHaysRDBjornerJB, et al.Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Med Care2007; 45: S22–S31.
19.
HuangMChenTZhouC, et al.Rasch analysis of the 32-item motor function measure in ambulant patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Clin Rehabil2023; 37: 569–582.
20.
PesudovsKBurrJMHarleyC, et al.The development, assessment, and selection of questionnaires. Optom Vis Sci2007; 84: 663–674.
21.
TennantAConaghanPG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper?Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)2007; 57: 1358–1362.
22.
EmbretsonSReiseP. Item response theory for psychologists.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, 2000.
23.
PesudovsKGaramendiEKeevesJP, et al.The Activities of Daily Vision Scale for cataract surgery outcomes: re-evaluating validity with Rasch analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci2003; 44: 2892–2899.
24.
StelmackJSzlykJPStelmackT, et al.Use of Rasch person-item map in exploratory data analysis: a clinical perspective. J Rehabil Res Dev2004; 41: 233–241.
25.
McHorneyCATarlovAR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate?Qual Life Res1995; 4: 293–307.
26.
WiechK. Deconstructing the sensation of pain: the influence of cognitive processes on pain perception. Science2016; 354: 584–587.
27.
TraceyIMantyhPW. The cerebral signature for pain perception and its modulation. Neuron2007; 55: 377–391.
28.
RiganelloFToninPSodduA. I feel! therefore, I am from pain to consciousness in DOC patients. Int J Mol Sci2023; 24: 11825.
29.
BolyMFaymonvilleM-ESchnakersC, et al.Perception of pain in the minimally conscious state with PET activation: an observational study. Lancet Neurol2008; 7: 1013–1020.
30.
LaureysSFaymonvilleM-EPeigneuxP, et al.Cortical processing of noxious somatosensory stimuli in the persistent vegetative state. Neuroimage2002; 17: 732–741.
31.
NaroALeoACannavòA, et al.Do unresponsive wakefulness syndrome patients feel pain? Role of laser-evoked potential-induced gamma-band oscillations in detecting cortical pain processing. Neuroscience2016; 317: 141–148.
32.
KassubekJJuenglingFDElsT, et al.Activation of a residual cortical network during painful stimulation in long-term postanoxic vegetative state: a 15O–H2O PET study. J Neurol Sci2003; 212: 85–91.
33.
YuTLangSVogelD, et al.Patients with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome respond to the pain cries of other people. Neurology2013; 80: 345–352.
34.
ChatelleCHaugerSLMartialC, et al.Assessment of nociception and pain in participants in an unresponsive or minimally conscious state after acquired brain injury: the relation between the coma recovery scale–revised and the nociception coma scale–revised. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2018; 99: 1755–1762.
35.
La PortaFCaselliSSusassiS, et al.Is the Berg Balance Scale an internally valid and reliable measure of balance across different etiologies in neurorehabilitation? A revisited rasch analysis study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2012; 93: 1209–1216.
36.
BooneWJScantleburyK. The role of Rasch analysis when conducting science education research utilizing multiple-choice tests. Sci Educ2006; 90: 253–269.
37.
VinkPLucasCMaaskantJ, et al.Clinimetric properties of the nociception coma scale (-Revised): a systematic review. Eur J Pain2017; 21: 1463–1474.
38.
MylonaIAletrasVZiakasN, et al.Rasch validation of the LVQOL scale. Acta Medica Cordoba2021; 64: 108–118.
39.
WannezSHeineLThonnardM, et al.The repetition of behavioral assessments in diagnosis of disorders of consciousness. Ann Neurol2017; 81: 883–889.
40.
SeelRTShererMWhyteJ, et al.Assessment scales for disorders of consciousness: evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice and research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2010; 91: 1795–1813.
41.
Gill-ThwaitesH. Lotteries, loopholes and luck: misdiagnosis in the vegetative state patient. Brain Inj2006; 20: 1321–1328.
42.
TiemannLHohnVDTa DinhS, et al.Distinct patterns of brain activity mediate perceptual and motor and autonomic responses to noxious stimuli. Nat Commun2018; 9: 4487.
43.
PincherleARossiFJöhrJ, et al.Early discrimination of cognitive motor dissociation from disorders of consciousness: pitfalls and clues. J Neurol2021; 268: 178–188.
44.
StevensRDNyquistPA. Coma, delirium, and cognitive dysfunction in critical illness. Crit Care Clin2006; 22: 787–804.
45.
HuangTLinS-HMalewiczNM, et al.Identifying the pathways required for coping behaviours associated with sustained pain. Nature2019; 565: 86–90.
46.
FormisanoRContradaMAloisiM, et al.Nociception Coma Scale with personalized painful stimulation versus standard stimulus in non-communicative patients with disorders of consciousness. Neuropsychol Rehabil2020; 30: 1893–1904.
47.
CorteseDRiganelloFArcuriF, et al.The trace conditional learning of the noxious stimulus in UWS patients and its prognostic value in a GSR and HRV entropy study. Front Hum Neurosci2020; 14: 97.
48.
KondziellaDBenderADiserensK, et al.European Academy of Neurology guideline on the diagnosis of coma and other disorders of consciousness. Eur J Neurol2020; 27: 741–756.
