| Title |
Is oral feeding compatible with an unresponsive wakefulness syndrome?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neurology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00415-018-8794-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Evelyne Mélotte, Audrey Maudoux, Sabrina Delhalle, Charlotte Martial, Georgios Antonopoulos, Stephen Karl Larroque, Sarah Wannez, Marie-Elisabeth Faymonville, Jean-François Kaux, Steven Laureys, Olivia Gosseries, Audrey Vanhaudenhuyse |
| Abstract |
The aim of the study is to explore the possibility of oral feeding in unresponsive wakefulness syndrome/vegetative state (UWS/VS) patients. We reviewed the clinical information of 68 UWS/VS patients (mean age 45 ± 11; range 16-79 years) searching for mention of oral feeding. UWS/VS diagnosis was made after repeated behavioural assessments using the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised. Patients also had complementary neuroimaging evaluations (positron emission tomography, functional magnetic resonance imaging and electroencephalography and diffusion tensor imaging). Out of the 68 UWS/VS patients, only two could resume oral feeding (3%). The first patient had oral feeding (only liquid and semi liquid) in addition to gastrostomy feeding and the second one could achieve full oral feeding (liquid and mixed solid food). Clinical assessments concluded that they fulfilled the criteria for a diagnosis of UWS/VS. Results from neuroimaging and neurophysiology were typical for the first patient with regard to the diagnosis of UWS/VS but atypical for the second patient. Oral feeding that implies a full and complex oral phase could probably be considered as a sign of consciousness. However, we actually do not know which components are necessary to consider the swallowing conscious as compared to reflex. We also discussed the importance of swallowing assessment and management in all patients with altered state of consciousness. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 22 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 27% |
| Neuroscience | 15 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 25 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 February 2018.
All research outputs
#20,466,701
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#4,028
of 4,523 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#292,574
of 331,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#84
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,523 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,055 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.