Injuries to the myelin are usually the least severe (neuropraxia), while injuries to the axons and supporting structures are more severe (axonotmesis is moderate injury, while neurotmesis is severe injury). It may be difficult to differentiate the severity by clinical findings due to common neurological impairments, including motor and sensory impairments distal to the lesion. Neurapraxia
Neurapraxia is the least severe form of nerve injury, with complete recovery. In this case, the axon remains intact, but there is myelin damage causing an interruption in conduction of the impulse down the nerve fiber. Most commonly, this involves compression of the nerve or disruption to the blood supply (ischemia). There is a temporary loss of function which is reversible within hours to months of the injury (the average is 6–8 weeks). Wallerian degeneration does not occur, so recovery does not involve actual regeneration. There is frequently greater involvement of motor than sensory function with autonomic function being retained. In electrodiagnostic testing with nerve conduction studies, there is a normal compound motor action potential amplitude distal to the lesion at day 10, and this indicates a diagnosis of mild neurapraxia instead of axonotmesis or neurotmesis. Axonotmesis
This is a more severe nerve injury with disruption of the neuronal axon, but with maintenance of the epineurium. This type of nerve damage may cause paralysis of the motor, sensory, and autonomic, and is mainly seen in crush injury.If the force creating the nerve damage is removed in a timely fashion, the axon may regenerate, leading to recovery.
The BEACON Project group developed an integrated care pathway entitled the Comfort Care Order Set, which delinates care for the last days of life in either a hospice or acute care inpatient setting. This order set was implemented and evaluated in a multisite system throughout six United States Veterans Affairs Medical Centers, and the study found increased orders for opioid medication post-pathway implementation, as well as more orders for antipsychotic medications, more patients undergoing palliative care consultations, more advance directives, and increased sublingual drug administration. The intervention did not, however, decrease the proportion of deaths that occurred in an ICU setting or the utilization of restraints around death. Home-based end-of-life care
While not possible for every person needing care, surveys of the general public suggest most people would prefer to die at home. In the period from 2003 to 2017, the number of deaths at home in the United States increased from 23.8% to 30.7%, while the number of deaths in the hospital decreased from 39.7% to 29.8%. Home-based end-of-life care may be delivered in a number of ways, including by an extension of a primary care practice, by a palliative care practice, and by home care agencies such as Hospice. High-certainty evidence indicates that implementation of home-based end-of-life care programs increases the number of adults who will die at home and slightly improves their satisfaction at a one-month follow-up. There is low-certainty evidence that there may be very little or no difference in satisfaction of the person needing care for longer term (6 months).