Evaluation de la douleur chez les personnes cérébrolésées non-communicantes aux soins intensifs

La douleur est fréquente en milieu de soins intensifs et sa gestion est l'une des missions des infirmières. Son évaluation est une prémisse indispensable à son soulagement. Cependant lorsque le patient est incapable de signaler sa douleur, les infirmières doivent se baser sur des signes externes pour l'évaluer. Les guides de bonne pratique recommandent chez les personnes non communicantes l'usage d'un instrument validé pour la population donnée et basé sur l'observation des comportements. A l'heure actuelle, les instruments d'évaluation de la douleur disponibles ne sont que partiellement adaptés aux personnes cérébrolésées dans la mesure où ces personnes présentent des comportements qui leur sont spécifiques. C'est pourquoi, cette étude vise à identifier, décrire et valider des indicateurs, et des descripteurs, de la douleur chez les personnes cérébrolésées. Un devis d'étude mixte multiphase avec une dominante quantitative a été choisi pour cette étude. Une première phase consistait à identifier des indicateurs et des descripteurs de la douleur chez les personnes cérébrolésées non communicantes aux soins intensifs en combinant trois sources de données : une revue intégrative des écrits, une démarche consultative utilisant la technique du groupe nominal auprès de 18 cliniciens expérimentés (6 médecins et 12 infirmières) et les résultats d'une étude pilote observationnelle réalisée auprès de 10 traumatisés crâniens. Les résultats ont permis d'identifier 6 indicateurs et 47 descripteurs comportementaux, vocaux et physiologiques susceptibles d'être inclus dans un instrument d'évaluation de la douleur destiné aux personnes cérébrolésées non- communicantes aux soins intensifs. Une deuxième phase séquentielle vérifiait les propriétés psychométriques des indicateurs et des descripteurs préalablement identifiés. La validation de contenu a été testée auprès de 10 experts cliniques et 4 experts scientifiques à l'aide d'un questionnaire structuré qui cherchait à évaluer la pertinence et la clarté/compréhensibilité de chaque descripteur. Cette démarche a permis de sélectionner 33 des 47 descripteurs et valider 6 indicateurs. Dans un deuxième temps, les propriétés psychométriques de ces indicateurs et descripteurs ont été étudiés au repos, lors de stimulation non nociceptive et lors d'une stimulation nociceptive (la latéralisation du patient) auprès de 116 personnes cérébrolésées aux soins intensifs hospitalisées dans deux centres hospitaliers universitaires. Les résultats montrent d'importantes variations dans les descripteurs observés lors de stimulation nociceptive probablement dues à l'hétérogénéité des patients au niveau de leur état de conscience. Dix descripteurs ont été éliminés, car leur fréquence lors de la stimulation nociceptive était inférieure à 5% ou leur fiabilité insuffisante. Les descripteurs physiologiques ont tous été supprimés en raison de leur faible variabilité et d'une fiabilité inter juge problématique. Les résultats montrent que la validité concomitante, c'est-à-dire la corrélation entre l'auto- évaluation du patient et les mesures réalisées avec les descripteurs, est satisfaisante lors de stimulation nociceptive {rs=0,527, p=0,003, n=30). Par contre la validité convergente, qui vérifiait l'association entre l'évaluation de la douleur par l'infirmière en charge du patient et les mesures réalisés avec les descripteurs, ainsi que la validité divergente, qui vérifiait si les indicateurs discriminent entre la stimulation nociceptive et le repos, mettent en évidence des résultats variables en fonction de l'état de conscience des patients. Ces résultats soulignent la nécessité d'étudier les descripteurs de la douleur chez des patients cérébrolésés en fonction du niveau de conscience et de considérer l'hétérogénéité de cette population dans la conception d'un instrument d'évaluation de la douleur pour les personnes cérébrolésées non communicantes aux soins intensifs. - Pain is frequent in the intensive care unit (ICU) and its management is a major issue for nurses. The assessment of pain is a prerequisite for appropriate pain management. However, pain assessment is difficult when patients are unable to communicate about their experience and nurses have to base their evaluation on external signs. Clinical practice guidelines highlight the need to use behavioral scales that have been validated for nonverbal patients. Current behavioral pain tools for ICU patients unable to communicate may not be appropriate for nonverbal brain-injured ICU patients, as they demonstrate specific responses to pain. This study aimed to identify, describe and validate pain indicators and descriptors in brain-injured ICU patients. A mixed multiphase method design with a quantitative dominant was chosen for this study. The first phase aimed to identify indicators and descriptors of pain for nonverbal brain- injured ICU patients using data from three sources: an integrative literature review, a consultation using the nominal group technique with 18 experienced clinicians (12 nurses and 6 physicians) and the results of an observational pilot study with 10 traumatic brain injured patients. The results of this first phase identified 6 indicators and 47 behavioral, vocal and physiological descriptors of pain that could be included in a pain assessment tool for this population. The sequential phase two tested the psychometric properties of the list of previously identified indicators and descriptors. Content validity was tested with 10 clinical and 4 scientific experts for pertinence and comprehensibility using a structured questionnaire. This process resulted in 33 descriptors to be selected out of 47 previously identified, and six validated indicators. Then, the psychometric properties of the descriptors and indicators were tested at rest, during non nociceptive stimulation and nociceptive stimulation (turning) in a sample of 116 brain-injured ICLI patients who were hospitalized in two university centers. Results showed important variations in the descriptors observed during the nociceptive stimulation, probably due to the heterogeneity of patients' level of consciousness. Ten descriptors were excluded, as they were observed less than 5% of the time or their reliability was insufficient. All physiologic descriptors were deleted as they showed little variability and inter observer reliability was lacking. Concomitant validity, testing the association between patients' self report of pain and measures performed using the descriptors, was acceptable during nociceptive stimulation (rs=0,527, p=0,003, n=30). However, convergent validity ( testing for an association between the nurses' pain assessment and measures done with descriptors) and divergent validity (testing for the ability of the indicators to discriminate between rest and a nociceptive stimulation) varied according to the level of consciousness These results highlight the need to study pain descriptors in brain-injured patients with different level of consciousness and to take into account the heterogeneity of this population forthe conception of a pain assessment tool for nonverbal brain-injured ICU patients.

Men perform comparably to women in a perspective taking task after administration of intranasal oxytocin but not after placebo

Oxytocin (OT) is thought to play an important role in human interpersonal information processing and behavior. By inference, OT should facilitate empathic responding, i.e. the ability to feel for others and to take their perspective. In two independent double-blind, placebo-controlled between-subjects studies, we assessed the effect of intranasally administered OT on affective empathy and perspective taking, whilst also examining potential sex differences (e.g., women being more empathic than men). In study 1, we provided 96 participants (48 men) with an empathy scenario and recorded self reports of empathic reactions to the scenario, while in study 2, a sample of 120 individuals (60 men) performed a computerized implicit perspective taking task. Whilst results from Study 1 showed no influence of OT on affective empathy, we found in Study 2 that OT exerted an effect on perspective taking ability in men. More specifically, men responded faster than women in the placebo group but they responded as slowly as women in the OT group. We conjecture that men in the OT group adopted a social perspective taking strategy, such as did women in both groups, but not men in the placebo group. On the basis of results across both studies, we suggest that self-report measures (such as used in Study 1) might be less sensitive to OT effects than more implicit measures of empathy such as that used in Study 2. If these assumptions are confirmed, one could infer that OT effects on empathic responses are more pronounced in men than women, and that any such effect is best studied using more implicit measures of empathy rather than explicit self-report measures.

Study of a Swiss dopa-responsive dystonia family with a deletion in GCH1: redefining DYT14 as DYT5.

OBJECTIVE: To report the study of a multigenerational Swiss family with dopa-responsive dystonia (DRD). METHODS: Clinical investigation was made of available family members, including historical and chart reviews. Subject examinations were video recorded. Genetic analysis included a genome-wide linkage study with microsatellite markers (STR), GTP cyclohydrolase I (GCH1) gene sequencing, and dosage analysis. RESULTS: We evaluated 32 individuals, of whom 6 were clinically diagnosed with DRD, with childhood-onset progressive foot dystonia, later generalizing, followed by parkinsonism in the two older patients. The response to levodopa was very good. Two additional patients had late onset dopa-responsive parkinsonism. Three other subjects had DRD symptoms on historical grounds. We found suggestive linkage to the previously reported DYT14 locus, which excluded GCH1. However, further study with more stringent criteria for disease status attribution showed linkage to a larger region, which included GCH1. No mutation was found in GCH1 by gene sequencing but dosage methods identified a novel heterozygous deletion of exons 3 to 6 of GCH1. The mutation was found in seven subjects. One of the patients with dystonia represented a phenocopy. CONCLUSIONS: This study rules out the previously reported DYT14 locus as a cause of disease, as a novel multiexonic deletion was identified in GCH1. This work highlights the necessity of an accurate clinical diagnosis in linkage studies as well as the need for appropriate allele frequencies, penetrance, and phenocopy estimates. Comprehensive sequencing and dosage analysis of known genes is recommended prior to genome-wide linkage analysis.