Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T18:11:08.225Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From Awareness to Prognosis: Ethical Implications of Uncovering Hidden Awareness in Behaviorally Nonresponsive Patients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 September 2019

MACKENZIE GRAHAM ,
EUGENE WALLACE ,
COLIN DOHERTY ,
ALISON MCCANN  and
LORINA NACI
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Long-term patient outcomes after severe brain injury are highly variable, and reliable prognostic indicators are urgently needed to guide treatment decisions. Functional neuroimaging is a highly sensitive method of uncovering covert cognition and awareness in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness, and there has been increased interest in using it as a research tool in acutely brain injured patients. When covert awareness is detected in a research context, this may impact surrogate decisionmaking—including decisions about life-sustaining treatment—even though the prognostic value of covert consciousness is currently unknown. This paper provides guidance to clinicians and families in incorporating individual research results of unknown prognostic value into surrogate decisionmaking, focusing on three potential issues: (1) Surrogate decisionmakers may misinterpret results; (2) Results may create false hope about the prospects of recovery; (3) There may be disagreement about the meaningfulness or relevance of results, and appropriateness of continued care.

Keywords

disorders of consciousnessneuroimagingsurrogate decisionmakingethicsbrain injuryprognosis
Type
Article
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 28 , Special Issue 4: Clinical Neuroethics , October 2019 , pp. 616 - 631
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Acknowledgement: This work was supported by the Wellcome Trust [203132/Z/16/Z].

References

Notes

1. The Royal College of Physicians. Prolonged disorders of consciousness: National clinical guidelines. 2015; available at https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/guidelines-policy/prolonged-disorders-consciousness-national-clinical-guidelines (last accessed 12 Feb 2019).

2. Chesnut RM, Ghajar J, Maas AIR, Marion DW, Servadei F, Teasdale GM, Unterberg A, et al. Early Indicators of Prognosis in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury. The Brain Trauma Foundation. The American Association of Neurological Surgeons. The Joint Section on Neurotrauma and Critical Care 2000; available at https://braintrauma.org/uploads/01/03/prognosis_guidelines.pdf (last accessed 12 Feb 2019).

3. Turgeon, AF, Lauzier, F, Burns, KEA, Meade, MO, Scales, DC, Zarychanski, R, Moor, L, et al. Determination of neurologic prognosis and clinical decision making in adult patients with severe traumatic brain injury: A survey of Canadian intensivists, neurosurgeons, and neurologists. Critical Care Medicine 2013;41(4):1086–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

4. Stevens, RD, Sutter, R. Prognosis in severe brain injury. Critical Care Medicine 2013;41:1104–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

5. Giacino, JT, Katz, DI, Schiff, ND, Whyte, J, Ashman, EJ, Ashwal, S, et al. Practice guideline update recommendations summary: Disorders of consciousness. Neurology 2018;91(10):450–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

6. Owen, AM, Coleman, MR, Boly, M, Davis, MH, Laureys, S, Pickard, JD. Detecting awareness in the vegetative state. Science 2006;313:1402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

7. Monti, MM, Vanhaudenhuyse, A, Coleman, MR, Boly, M, Pickard, JD, Tshibanda, L, et al. Willful modulation of brain activity in disorders of consciousness. New England Journal of Medicine 2010;362:579–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

8. Cruse, D, Chennu, S, Chatelle, C, Bekinschtein, TA, Fernandez-Espejo, D, Pickard, JD, et al. Bedside detection of awareness in the vegetative state: A cohort study. The Lancet 2011;378(9809):2088–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

9. Bardin, JC, Fins, JJ, Katz, DI, Hersh, J, Heier, LA, Tabelow, K, et al. Dissociations between behavioural and functional magnetic resonance-based evaluations of cognitive function after brain injury. Brain 2011;134:769–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10. Fernandez-Espejo, D, Owen, AM. Detecting awareness after severe brain injury. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2013;14:801–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

11. Naci, L, Owen, AM. Making every word count for vegetative patients. JAMA Neurology 2013;70(10):1235–41.Google Scholar

12. Naci, L, Cusack, R, Anello, M, Owen, AM. A common neural code for similar conscious experiences in different individuals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 2014;111:14277–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

13. Naci, L, Sinai, L, Owen, AM. Detecting and interpreting conscious experiences in behaviourally non-responsive patients. NeuroImage 2017;145(Pt.B):304–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14. Naci, L, Haugg, A, MacDonald, A, Anello, M, Houldin, E, Naqshbandi, S, Gonzalez-Lara, LE, Arango, M, Harle, C, Cusack, R, Owen, AM. Functional diversity of brain networks supports consciousness and verbal intelligence. Scientific Reports 2018;8:Article number 13259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

15. Weijer, C, Bruni, T, Gofton, T, Young, GB, Norton, L, Peterson, A, Owen, AM. Ethical considerations in functional magnetic resonance imaging research in acutely comatose patients. Brain 2015;139(1):292–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

16. Peterson, A, Cruse, D, Naci, L, Weijer, C, Owen, AM. Risk, diagnostic error, and the clinical science of consciousness. NeuroImage Clinical 2015;7:588–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17. Edlow, BL, Chatelle, C, Spencer, CA, Chu, CJ, Bodien, YG, O’Connor, KL, et al. Early detection of consciousness in patients with acute severe traumatic brain injury. Brain 2017;140(9):2399–414.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

18. Edlow, BL. Covert consciousness: Searching for volitional brain activity in the unresponsive. Current Biology 2018;28(23):1345–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

19. Edlow, BL, Fins, JJ. Assessment of covert consciousness in the Intensive Care Unit: Clinical and ethical considerations. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2018;33(6):424–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

20. Graham, M, Doherty, C, Naci, L. Using neuroimaging to detect covert awareness and determine prognosis of comatose patients: Informing surrogate decision makers of individual patient results. Seminars in Neurology 2018;38(5):555–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

21. Naro, A, Calabro, RS, Pollicino, P, Lombardo, C, Bramanti, P. Unexpected recovery from a vegetative state or misdiagnosis? Lesson learned from a case report. Neurorehabilitation 2017;41(4):735–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

22. Delargy, M, O’Connor, R, McCann, A, Galligan, I, Cronin, H, Gray, D, O’Toole, C. An analysis of the effects of using Zolpidem and an innovative multimodal interdisciplinary team approach in prolonged disorders of consciousness (PDOC). Brain Injury 2019;33(2):242–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23. Estraneo, A, Moretta, P, Loreto, V, Lanzillo, B, Santoro, L, Trojano, L. Late recovery after traumatic, anoxic, or hemorrhagic long-lasting vegetative state. Neurology 2010;75(3):239–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

24. See note 6, Owen et al. 2006.

25. See note 7, Monti et al. 2010.

26. See note 12, Naci et al. 2014.

27. See note 14, Naci et al. 2018.

28. See note 12, Naci et al. 2014.

29. See note 14, Naci et al. 2018.

30. See note 12, Naci et al. 2014.

31. See note 13, Naci et al. 2017.

32. See note 20, Graham et al. 2018.

33. White, DB, Ernecoff, N, Buddadhumaruk, P, Hong, S, Weissfeld, L, Curtis, JR, et al. Prevalence of and factors related to discordance about prognosis between physicians and surrogate decision makers of critically ill patients. JAMA 2016;315(19):2086–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

34. The Multi-Society Task Force on PVS. Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state. New England Journal of Medicine 1994;330:1499–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

35. Schiff, ND. Recovery of consciousness after brain injury: A mesocircuit hypothesis. Trends in Neuroscience 2010;33(1):1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

36. See note 7, Monti et al. 2010.

37. See note 10, Fernandez-Espejo, Owen 2013.

38. See note 6, Owen et al. 2006.

39. See note 10, Fernandez-Espejo, Owen 2013.

40. See note 11, Naci et al. 2013.

41. See note 11, Naci et al. 2013.

42. Gibson, RM, Chennu, S, Fernandez-Espejo, D, Naci, L, Owen, AM, Cruse, D. Somatosensory attention identifies both overt and covert awareness in disorders of consciousness. Annals of Neurology 2016;80(3):412–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

43. See note 7, Monti et al. 2010.

44. See note 11, Naci et al. 2013.

45. See note 6, Owen et al. 2006

46. See note 11, Naci et al. 2013.

47. See note 14, Naci et al. 2018.

48. See note 12, Naci et al. 2014.

49. Naci, L, Graham, M, Owen, AM, Weijer, C. Covert narrative capacity: Mental life in patients thought to lack consciousness. Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology 2017;4(1):61–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

50. Graham, M, Weijer, C, Cruse, D, Fernandez-Espejo, D, Gofton, T, Gonzalez-Lara, L, et al. An ethics of welfare for patients diagnosed as vegetative with covert awareness. American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 2015;6(2):31–41.Google Scholar

51. Graham, M. A Fate Worse Than Death? The well-being of patients diagnosed as vegetative with covert awareness. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2017;20(5):1005–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

52. Bernat, JL. Ethical issues in the treatment of severe brain injury: The impact of new technologies. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2009;1157(1):117–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

53. Longstreth, WT, Holloway, R. Predicting decline and survival in severe acute brain injury: The fourth trajectory. British Medical Journal 2015;351:h3904.Google Scholar

54. Fernandez, CV, Kodish, E, Weijer, C. Informing study participants of research results: An ethical imperative. IRB: Ethics and Human Research 2003;25(3):12–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

55. Long, B, Clark, L, Cook, P. Surrogate decision-making for patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Journal of Trauma Nursing 2011;18(4):204–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

56. Graham, M, Weijer, C, Peterson, A, Naci, L, Cruse, D, Fernandez-Espejo, D, et al. Acknowledging awareness: Informing families of individual research results for patients in the vegetative state Journal of Medical Ethics 2015;41:534–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

57. See note 55, Long et al. 2011.

58. Mehta, S, Pelletier, FQ, Brown, M, Ethier, C, Wells, D, Burry, L, MacDonald, R. Why substitute decision makers provide or decline consent for ICU research studies: A questionnaire study. Intensive Care Medicine 2012;38(1):47–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

59. See note 16, Peterson et al. 2015.

60. Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council. Assessing public attitudes to health related findings in research 2012; available at https://wellcome.ac.uk/sites/default/files/wtvm055196_0.pdf (last accessed 12 Feb 2019).

61. See note 55, Long et al. 2011.

62. See note 60, Wellcome Trust 2012.

63. See note 56, Graham et al. 2015.

64. See note 55, Long et al. 2011.

65. Verhaeghe, STL, Van Zuuren, FJ, Defloor, T, Duijnstee, MSH, Grypdonck, MHF. How does information influence hope in family members of traumatic coma patients in intensive care unit? Journal of Clinical Nursing 2007;16(8):1488–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

66. Quinn, T, Moskowitz, J, Khan, MW, Shutter, L, Goldberg, R, Col, N, et al. What families need and physicians deliver: Contrasting communication preferences between surrogate decision-makers and physicians during outcome prognostication in critically ill TBI patients. Neurocritical Care 2017;27(2):154–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

67. Ruddick, W. Hope and deception. Bioethics 1999;13:343–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

68. See note 33, White et al. 2016.

69. Bond, AE, Draeger, CRL, Mandelco, B, Donnelly, M. Needs of family members of patients with severe traumatic brain injury: Implications for evidence-based practice. Critical Care Nurse 2003;23(4):63–72.Google ScholarPubMed

70. Zier, LS, Burack, JH, Micco, G, Chipman, AK, Frank, JA, Luce, JM, et al. Doubt and belief in physicians’ ability to prognosticate during critical illness: The perspective of surrogate decision makers. Critical Care Medicine 2008;36(8):2341–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

71. See note 66, Quinn et al. 2017.

72. See note 70, Zier et al. 2008.

73. See note 66, Quinn et al. 2017.

74. See note 65, Verhaeghe et al. 2007.

75. See note 70, Zier et al. 2008.

76. Boyd, EA, Lo, B, Evans, LR, Malvar, G, Apatira, L, Luce, JM, et al. “It’s not just what the doctor tells me:” Factors that influence surrogate decision-makers’ perceptions of prognosis. Critical Care Medicine 2010;38(5):1270–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

77. McMillan, J, Walker, S, Hope, T. Valuing hope. Monash Bioethics Review 2014;32(1–2):33–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

78. Kitzinger, J, Kitzinger, C. The ‘window of opportunity’ for death after severe brain injury: Family experiences. Sociology of Health and Illness 2013;35(7):1095–112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

79. An NHS Trust v Y (by his litigation friend, the Official Solicitor) & another (Appellants) [2018] UKSC 46; available at https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0202-judgment.pdf (last accessed 12 Feb 2019).

80. See note 78, Kitzinger, Kitzinger 2013.

81. See note 19, Edlow 2018.

82. See note 55, Long et al. 2011.

83. Jensen, HI, Ammentorp, J, Erlandsen, M, Ording, H. Withholding or withdrawing therapy in intensive care units: An analysis of collaboration among healthcare professionals. Intensive Care Medicine 2011;37(10):1696–705.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

84. Flannery, L, Ramjan, LM, Peters, K. End-of-life decisions in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) – Exploring the experiences of ICU nurses and doctors – A critical literature review. Australian Critical Care 2016;29(2):97–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

85. Frost, DW, Cook, DJ, Heyland, DK, Fowler, RA. Patient and healthcare professional factors influencing end-of-life decision making during critical illness: A systematic review. Critical Care Medicine 2011;39(5):1174–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

86. Wilson, ME, Rhudy, LM, Ballinger, BA, Tescher, AN, Pickering, BW, Gajic, O. Factors that contribute to physician variability in decision to limit life support in ICU: A qualitative study. Intensive Care Medicine 2013;39(6):1009–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

87. Wilkinson, DJ, Truog, RD. The luck of the draw: Physician-related variability in end-of-life decision-making in intensive care. Intensive Care Medicine 2015;39(6):1128–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

88. Peterson, A, Norton, L, Naci, L, Owen, AM, Weijer, C. Towards a science of brain death. American Journal of Bioethics 2014;14(8):29–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

89. Racine, E, Dion, MJ, Wijman, CAC, Illes, J, Lansberg, MG. Profiles of neurological outcome prediction among intensivists. Neurocritical Care 2009;11:345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

90. Rodrigue, C, Riopelle, RJ, Bernat, JL, Racine, E. Perspectives and experience of healthcare professionals on diagnosis, prognosis, and end-of-life decision making in patients with disorders of consciousness. Neuroethics 2013;6(1):25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

91. Mahar, C. Ethical choices for patients in the vegetative state: Discerning the Catholic moral tradition in contemporary health care. In: Jox, RJ, Kuehlmeyer, K, Marckmann, G, Racine, E, eds. Vegetative State- A Paradigmatic Problem of Modern Societies: Medical, Ethical, Legal and Social Perspectives on Chronic Disorders of Consciousness. Zurich: Lit Verling; 2012.Google Scholar

92. Barry, R. The papal allocution on caring for persons in a “vegetative state.” Issues in Law and Medicine 2004;20(2):155–64.Google Scholar

93. Assisted Decision Making (Capacity) Act 2015. (2015). Office of the Attorney General; available at http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2015/act/64/enacted/en/html (last accessed 12 Feb 2019).

94. Mental Capacity Act 2005. (2005), 1st ed. [ebook] Legislation.gov.uk, p.Section 16A; available at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/9/contents ( last accessed 12 Feb 2019).

95. See note 94, Mental Capacity Act 2005.

96. 59 W v M [2011] EWHC 2443 (Fam).

97. 60 Briggs v Briggs [2016] EWCOP 53.

98. See note 66, Quinn et al. 2017.

99. See note 90, Rodrigue et al. 2013.

100. See note 78, Kitzinger, Kitzinger 2013.

101. See note 76, Boyd et al. 2010.

102. See note 76, Boyd et al. 2010.

103. Schiff, ND, Giacino, JT, Kalmar, K, Victor, JD, Baker, K, Gerber, M, et al. Behavioural improvements with thalamic stimulation after severe traumatic brain injury. Nature 2007;448:600–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

104. Thibaut, A, Bruno, MA, Ledoux, D, Demertzi, A, Laureys, S. tDCS in patients with disorders of consciousness: Sham-controlled randomized double blind-study. Neurology 2014;82(13):1112–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

105. Monti, MM, Schnakers, C, Korb, AS, Bystritsky, A, Vespa, PM. Non-invasive ultrasonic thalamic stimulation in disorders of consciousness after severe brain injury: A first-in-man report. Brain Stimulation 2016;9(6):940–1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

106. See note 22, Delargy et al. 2019.

107. Giacino, JT, Whyte, J, Bagiella, E, Kalmar, K, Childs, N, Khademi, A, et al. Placebo-controlled trial of Amantadine for severe traumatic brain injury. New England Journal of Medicine 2012;366:819–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

108. See note 51, Graham 2017.

109. See note 7, Monti et al. 2010.

110. See note 10, Fernandez-Espejo, Owen 2013.

111. See note 11, Naci et al. 2013.

112. Naci, L, Monti, MM, Cruse, D, Kubler, A, Sorger, B, Goebel, R, et al. Brain-computer interfaces for communication with nonresponsive patients. Annals of Neurology 2012;72(3):312–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

113. Lule, D, Zickler, C, Hacker, S, Bruno, MA, Demertzi, A, Pellas, F, et al. Life can be worth living in locked in syndrome. Progress in Brain Research 2009;177:339–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

114. Bruno, M-A, Bernheim, JL, Ledoux, D, Pellas, F, Demertzi, A, Laureys, S. A survey on self-assessed well-being in a cohort of chronic locked-in syndrome patients: Happy majority, miserable minority. British Medical Journal Open 2011;1(1):e000039.Google Scholar

115. Nizzi, MC, Demertzi, A, Gosseries, O, Bruno, MA, Jouen, F, Laureys, S. From armchair to wheelchair: How patients with a locked-in syndrome integrate bodily changes in experienced identity. Conscious Cognition 2012;21(1):431–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

116. See note 78, Kitzinger, Kitzinger 2013.

117. See note 78, Kitzinger, Kitzinger 2013.

118. See note 89, Racine et al. 2009.

119. See note 90, Rodrigue et al. 2013.