Changes in responsiveness when brain injury survivors with impaired consciousness hear different voices

References

• Ansell BJ. Slow-to-recover brain-injured patients: Rationale for treatment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1991; 34: 1017–1022
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Davis AE, White JJ. Innovative sensory input for the comatose brain-injured patient. Critical Care Nursing Clinics of North America 1995; 7: 351–361
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gerber CS. Understanding and managing coma stimulation: Are we doing everything we can?. Critical Care Nursing 2005; 28: 94–108
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tolle P, Reimer M. Do we need stimulation programs as a part of nursing care for patients in ‘persistent vegetative state’? A conceptual analysis. Axon 2003; 25: 20–26
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kater K. Response of head-injured patients to sensory stimulation. Western Journal of Nursing Research 1989; 11: 20–33
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gruner ML, Terhaag D. Multimodal early onset stimulation (MEOS) in rehabilitation after brain injury. Brain Injury 2000; 14: 585–594
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones R, Hux K, Morton-Anderson K, Knepper L. Auditory stimulation effect on a comatose survivor of traumatic brain injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1994; 75: 164–171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boly M, Faymonville M, Peigneux P, Lambermont B, Damas P, Del Fiore G, Degueldre C, Franck G, Luxen A, Lamy M, et al. Auditory processing in severely brain injury patients: Differences between the minimally conscious state and the persistent vegetative state. Archives of Neurology 2004; 61: 233–238
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boly M, Faymonville M, Peigneux P, Lambermont B, Damas F, Luxen A, Lamy M, Moonen G, Maquet P, Laureys S. Cerebral processing of auditory and noxious stimuli in severely brain injury patients: Differences between VS and MCS. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 2005; 15: 283–289
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman MR, Rodd JM, Davis MH, Johnsrude IS, Menon DK, Pickard JD, Owen AM. Do vegetative patients retain aspects of language comprehension? Evidence from fMRI. Brain 2007; 130: 2494–2507
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di HB, Yu SM, Weng XC, Laureys S, Yu D, Li JQ, Qin PM, Zhu YH, Zhang SZ, Chen YZ. Cerebral response to patient's own name in the vegetative and minimally conscious states. Neurology 2007; 68: 895–899
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen AM, Coleman MR, Boly M, Davis MH, Laureys S, Pickard JD. Detecting awareness in the vegetative state. Science 2006; 313: 1402
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perrin F, Schnakers C, Schabus M, Degueldre C, Goldman S, Bredart S, Faymonville M, Lamy M, Moonen G, Luxen A, et al. Brain response to one's own name in vegetative state, minimally conscious state, and locked-in syndrome. Archives of Neurology 2006; 63: 562–569
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiff ND, Rodriguez-Moreno D, Kamal A, Kim KHS, Giacino JT, Plum F, Hirsch J. fMRI reveals large-scale network activation in minimally conscious patients. Neurology 2005; 64: 514–523
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotchoubey D, Lang S, Herb E, Maurer P, Schmalohr D, Bostanov V, Birbaumer N. Neuroscience Letters 2003; 352: 129–132
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fins JJ, Plum F. Neurological diagnosis is more than a state of mind: Diagnostic clarity and impaired consciousness. Archives of Neurology 2004; 61: 1354–1355
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canedo A, Grix MC, Nicoletti J. An analysis of assessment instructions for the minimally responsive patient (MRP): Clinical observations. Brain Injury 2002; 16: 453–461
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson S, Brock D, Powell G, Thwaites H, Elliott K. Constructing arousal profiles for vegetative state patients—a preliminary report. Brain Injury 1996; 10: 105–113
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson B, Christensen L. Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 2007
   Google Scholar
• Hagen C. Rancho los amigos levels of cognitive functioning-revised. Presented at TBI rehabilitation in a managed care environment: An interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation. Continuing Education Programs of America, San Antonio 2000
   Google Scholar
• http://www.research.att.com/projects/tts/demo.html, accessed January 2006, AT&T Labs, Inc. Research. Text-to-speech demonstration
   Google Scholar
• Gravetter F, Wallnau L. Statistics for the behavioral sciences5th. Wadsworth, Belmont 2000
   Google Scholar
• Anderson N. Empirical direction in design and analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Mahwah 2001
   Google Scholar
• Mapou R. Neuropathology and neuropsychology of behavioural disturbances following traumatic brain injury. Handbook of head trauma acute care to recovery, C Long, L Ross. Plenum Press, New York 1992; 75–105
   Google Scholar
• Hagen C. Language-cognitive disorganization following closed head injury: A conceptualization. Cognitive rehabilitation: Conceptualization and intervention, LE Trexler. Plenum, New York 1982; 131–151
   Google Scholar
• Johnson D, Roethig-Johnston K, Richards D. Biochemical and physiological parameters of recovery in acute severe head injury: Responses to multisensory stimulation. Brain Injury 1993; 7: 491–499
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rader M, Alston J, Ellis D. Sensory stimulation of severely brain-injured patients. Brain Injury 1989; 3: 141–147
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Oh H, Seo W. Sensory stimulation programme to improve recovery in comatose patients. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2003; 12: 394–404
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hux K, Burke R. Assessment and treatment of impaired consciousness: Coma, vegetative state, minimal responsiveness, and posttraumatic amnesia. Assisting survivors of traumatic brain injury: The role of speech-language pathologists, K Hux. Pro-Ed, Austin 2003; 61–92
   Google Scholar