Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Corneal Reflex Testing in the Evaluation of a Comatose Patient: An Ode to Precise Semiology and Examination Skills

  • Original Work
  • Published:
Neurocritical Care Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background/Objective

The corneal reflex assesses the integrity of the trigeminal and facial cranial nerves. This brainstem reflex is fundamental in neuroprognostication after cardiac arrest and in brain death determination. We sought to investigate corneal reflex testing methods among neurologists and general critical care providers in the context of neuroprognostication following cardiac arrest.

Methods

This is an international cross-sectional study disseminated to members of the Neurocritical Care Society, Society of Critical Care Medicine, and American Academy of Neurology. We utilized an open Web-based survey (Qualtrics®, Provo, UT, USA) to disseminate 26 questions regarding neuroprognostication practices following cardiac arrest, in which 3 questions pertained to corneal reflex testing. Descriptive statistical measures were used, and subgroup analyses performed between neurologists and non-neurologists. Questions were not mandatory; therefore, the percentages were relative to the number of respondents for each question.

Results

There were 959 respondents in total. Physicians comprised 85.1% of practitioners (762 out of 895), of which 55% (419) identified themselves as non-neurologists and 45% (343) as neurologists. Among physicians, 85.9% (608 out of 708) deemed corneal reflex relevant for prognostication following cardiac arrest (neurologists 84.4% versus non-neurologists 87.0%). A variety of techniques were employed for corneal reflex testing, the most common being “light cotton touch” (59.2%), followed by “cotton-tipped applicator with pressure” (23.9%), “saline or water squirt” (15.9%), and “puff of air” (1.0%). There were no significant differences in the methods for testing between neurologists and non-neurologists (p = 0.52). The location of stimulus application was variable, and 26.1% of physicians (148/567) apply the stimulus on the temporal conjunctiva rather than on the cornea itself.

Conclusions

Corneal reflex testing remains a cornerstone of the coma exam and is commonly used in neuroprognostication of unconscious cardiac arrest survivors and in brain death determination. A wide variability of techniques is noted among practitioners, including some that may provide suboptimal stimulation of corneal nerve endings. Imprecise testing in this setting may lead to inaccuracies in critical settings, which carries significant consequences such as guiding decisions of care limitations, misdiagnosis of brain death, and loss of public trust.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Posner JB, Saper CB, Schiff N, Plum F. Plum and Posner’s diagnosis of stupor and coma. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ropper AH, Gress DR, Diringer MN, Green DM, Mayer SA, Bleck TP. Neurological and neurosurgical intensive care. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wijdicks EF, Bamlet WR, Maramattom BV, Manno EM, McClelland RL. Validation of a New Coma Scale: the Four Score. Ann Neurol. 2005;58:585–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Wijdicks EF, Varelas PN, Gronseth GS, Greer DM. Evidence-based guideline update: determining brain death in adults: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2010;74:1911–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wijdicks EF, Hijdra A, Young GB, Bassetti CL, Wiebe S. Quality standards subcommittee of the American Academy of N Practice parameter: prediction of outcome in comatose survivors after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (an evidence-based review): report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2006;67:203–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Callaway CW, Donnino MW, Fink EL, et al. Part 8: post-Cardiac Arrest Care: 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation. 2015;132:S465–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rossetti AO, Rabinstein AA, Oddo M. Neurological prognostication of outcome in patients in coma after cardiac arrest. Lancet Neurol. 2016;15(6):597–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Aramideh M, Ongerboer de Visser BW, Koelman JH, Majoie CB, Holstege G. The late blink reflex response abnormality due to lesion of the lateral tegmental field. Brain. 1997;120(Pt 9):1685–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of web surveys: the checklist for reporting results of internet e-surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004;6:e34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Yang AY, Chow J, Liu J. Corneal innervation and sensation: the eye and beyond. Yale J Biol Med. 2018;91:13–21.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Esteban A. A neurophysiological approach to brainstem reflexes. Blink reflex. Clin Neurophysiol. 1999;29:7–38.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Acosta MC, Tan ME, Belmonte C, Gallar J. Sensations evoked by selective mechanical, chemical, and thermal stimulation of the conjunctiva and cornea. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:2063–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gardner HB. The corneal reflex the most reliable guide in anaesthesia. Br Med J. 1905;1:244–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Dr. Carolina B. Maciel has received the Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center Junior Scholar award that supports pre-clinical studies of mechanisms of secondary brain injury in a rodent cardiac arrest model.

Funding

This study was supported by the Department of Neurology of Yale University.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Carolina B. Maciel and Teddy S. Youn have contributed equally to the manuscript and share co-first authorship.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurology, UF Health, Shands Hospital, McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida College of Medicine, University of Florida, Room L3-185, 1149 Newell Drive, Gainesville, FL, 32611, USA

    Carolina B. Maciel & Teddy S. Youn

  2. Department of Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA

    Carolina B. Maciel, Mary M. Barden, Monica B. Dhakar, Sonya E. Zhou & David M. Greer

  3. Department of Neurology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA

    Carolina B. Maciel & Jeremy J. Theriot

  4. Department of Neurology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA

    Monica B. Dhakar

  5. Stroke Service, Neurology Division, Department of Neuroscience and Behavioral Sciences, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil

    Octavio M. Pontes-Neto

  6. Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Universidade Federal de São Paulo and Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

    Gisele Sampaio Silva

  7. Department of Neurology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, 02118, USA

    David M. Greer

Authors
  1. Carolina B. Maciel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Teddy S. Youn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mary M. Barden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Monica B. Dhakar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sonya E. Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Octavio M. Pontes-Neto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gisele Sampaio Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Jeremy J. Theriot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. David M. Greer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

CBM, MMB, TSY and DMG conceived the presented study and developed the survey. CBM and TSY drafted the manuscript. JJT and MBD provided critical contributions to data analyses. All authors revised to provide critical contributions to the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carolina B. Maciel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. Maciel, Dr. Youn, Dr. Barden, Ms. Zhou, Dr. Pontes-Neto, Dr. Silva, Dr. Theriot, and Dr. Greer have nothing to disclose. Dr. Dhakar reports personal fees from Adamas Pharmaceuticals, other from UCB Biopharma, other from Marinus Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work.

Ethical Approval/Informed Consent

The Yale Institutional Review Board approved this study and granted waiver of consent.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 48 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maciel, C.B., Youn, T.S., Barden, M.M. et al. Corneal Reflex Testing in the Evaluation of a Comatose Patient: An Ode to Precise Semiology and Examination Skills. Neurocrit Care 33, 399–404 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-019-00896-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-019-00896-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation