临床应用 fMRI 和 EEG 检测认知运动分离:一家急症医院的经验教训。

IF 2.3 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neurology. Clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-25 DOI:10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200390
Yelena G Bodien, Matteo Fecchio, Holly J Freeman, William R Sanders, Anogue Meydan, Phoebe K Lawrence, John E Kirsch, David Fischer, Joseph Cohen, Emily Rubin, Julian H He, Pamela W Schaefer, Leigh R Hochberg, Otto Rapalino, Sydney S Cash, Michael J Young, Brian L Edlow
{"title":"临床应用 fMRI 和 EEG 检测认知运动分离:一家急症医院的经验教训。","authors":"Yelena G Bodien, Matteo Fecchio, Holly J Freeman, William R Sanders, Anogue Meydan, Phoebe K Lawrence, John E Kirsch, David Fischer, Joseph Cohen, Emily Rubin, Julian H He, Pamela W Schaefer, Leigh R Hochberg, Otto Rapalino, Sydney S Cash, Michael J Young, Brian L Edlow","doi":"10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200390","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cognitive motor dissociation (CMD) occurs when patients with severe brain injury follow commands on task-based functional MRI or EEG assessment despite demonstrating no behavioral evidence of language function. Recognizing the value of identifying patients with CMD, evidence-based guidelines published in the United States and Europe now recommend that these assessments are conducted as part of clinical care for select patients.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>We describe our institutionally supported approach for clinical assessment of CMD and report lessons learned so that other centers can more easily implement these evaluations. Among the key lessons are the need to consider ethical implications of CMD assessment; establish standardized local protocols for patient selection, data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation; and develop effective strategies for communication of test results.</p><p><strong>Implications for practice: </strong>Independent validation of methods to assess CMD is not available. Our approach for clinical CMD assessment is intended to be flexible, allowing for iterative improvements as the evidence base grows.</p>","PeriodicalId":19136,"journal":{"name":"Neurology. Clinical practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515113/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical Implementation of fMRI and EEG to Detect Cognitive Motor Dissociation: Lessons Learned in an Acute Care Hospital.\",\"authors\":\"Yelena G Bodien, Matteo Fecchio, Holly J Freeman, William R Sanders, Anogue Meydan, Phoebe K Lawrence, John E Kirsch, David Fischer, Joseph Cohen, Emily Rubin, Julian H He, Pamela W Schaefer, Leigh R Hochberg, Otto Rapalino, Sydney S Cash, Michael J Young, Brian L Edlow\",\"doi\":\"10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200390\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cognitive motor dissociation (CMD) occurs when patients with severe brain injury follow commands on task-based functional MRI or EEG assessment despite demonstrating no behavioral evidence of language function. Recognizing the value of identifying patients with CMD, evidence-based guidelines published in the United States and Europe now recommend that these assessments are conducted as part of clinical care for select patients.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>We describe our institutionally supported approach for clinical assessment of CMD and report lessons learned so that other centers can more easily implement these evaluations. Among the key lessons are the need to consider ethical implications of CMD assessment; establish standardized local protocols for patient selection, data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation; and develop effective strategies for communication of test results.</p><p><strong>Implications for practice: </strong>Independent validation of methods to assess CMD is not available. Our approach for clinical CMD assessment is intended to be flexible, allowing for iterative improvements as the evidence base grows.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurology. Clinical practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515113/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurology. Clinical practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200390\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology. Clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200390","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:当严重脑损伤患者在基于任务的功能性磁共振成像或脑电图评估中听从命令时,尽管没有表现出语言功能的行为证据,但仍会发生认知运动分离(CMD)。由于认识到识别 CMD 患者的价值,美国和欧洲发布的循证指南目前建议将这些评估作为对特定患者进行临床护理的一部分:我们介绍了本机构支持的 CMD 临床评估方法,并报告了所吸取的经验教训,以便其他中心能更轻松地实施这些评估。主要经验包括:需要考虑 CMD 评估的伦理影响;为患者选择、数据采集、分析和解释建立标准化的本地协议;以及制定有效的测试结果沟通策略:对实践的启示:目前尚无独立的CMD评估方法验证。我们的临床 CMD 评估方法具有灵活性,可随着证据基础的扩大而不断改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical Implementation of fMRI and EEG to Detect Cognitive Motor Dissociation: Lessons Learned in an Acute Care Hospital.

Background: Cognitive motor dissociation (CMD) occurs when patients with severe brain injury follow commands on task-based functional MRI or EEG assessment despite demonstrating no behavioral evidence of language function. Recognizing the value of identifying patients with CMD, evidence-based guidelines published in the United States and Europe now recommend that these assessments are conducted as part of clinical care for select patients.

Recent findings: We describe our institutionally supported approach for clinical assessment of CMD and report lessons learned so that other centers can more easily implement these evaluations. Among the key lessons are the need to consider ethical implications of CMD assessment; establish standardized local protocols for patient selection, data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation; and develop effective strategies for communication of test results.

Implications for practice: Independent validation of methods to assess CMD is not available. Our approach for clinical CMD assessment is intended to be flexible, allowing for iterative improvements as the evidence base grows.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neurology. Clinical practice
Neurology. Clinical practice CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Neurology® Genetics is an online open access journal publishing peer-reviewed reports in the field of neurogenetics. The journal publishes original articles in all areas of neurogenetics including rare and common genetic variations, genotype-phenotype correlations, outlier phenotypes as a result of mutations in known disease genes, and genetic variations with a putative link to diseases. Articles include studies reporting on genetic disease risk, pharmacogenomics, and results of gene-based clinical trials (viral, ASO, etc.). Genetically engineered model systems are not a primary focus of Neurology® Genetics, but studies using model systems for treatment trials, including well-powered studies reporting negative results, are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信