Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Dev Neurorehabil. 2014 Aug;17(4):251-8. doi: 10.3109/17518423.2013.793751. Epub 2013 Jul 19.

Microswitch-aided programs with contingent stimulation versus general stimulation programs for post-coma persons with multiple disabilities.

Author information

1
Department of Neuroscience and Sense Organs, University of Bari , Bari , Italy .

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Assessing the impact of microswitch-aided programs with contingent stimulation on response engagement (Study I) and post-session alertness (Study II) of post-coma participants with multiple disabilities.

METHOD:

Study I included three participants whose scores on the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) were 11 or 13. Study II included three participants whose CRS-R scores were 19, 13, and 14. In both studies, the participants received sessions with contingent stimulation (i.e., sessions in which activation of a microswitch with an eyelid or hand response produced 15 s of preferred stimulation) and sessions with general, non-contingent stimulation (i.e., stimulation lasted throughout the sessions).

RESULTS:

Study I showed an increase in response engagement/frequencies only during the contingent stimulation sessions. Study II showed that the participants' level of vigilance after those sessions was higher than after non-contingent stimulation sessions.

CONCLUSION:

Microswitch-aided programs with contingent stimulation would be more beneficial than programs with general/non-contingent stimulation.

KEYWORDS:

Alertness; consciousness disorders; contingent stimulation; microswitches; motor impairment; response engagement

PMID:
23869535
DOI:
10.3109/17518423.2013.793751
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Taylor & Francis
Loading ...
Support Center