Physiological reactivity at rest and in response to social or emotional stimuli after a traumatic brain injury: A systematic review

Numerous studies have shown that alterations in physiological reactivity (PR) after traumatic brain injury (TBI) are possibly associated with emotional deficits. We conducted a systematic review of these studies that evaluated PR in adults with moderate-to-severe TBI, either at rest or in response to emotional, stressful, or social stimuli. We focused on the most common measures of physiological response, including heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV), respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA), electrodermal activity (EDA), salivary cortisol, facial electromyography (EMG), and blink reflex. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted across six databases (PsycINFO, Psycarticles, SciencDirect, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Scopus). The search returned 286 articles and 18 studies met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Discrepancies were observed according to the type of physiological measure. Reduced physiological responses in patients with TBI have been reported in most EDA studies, which were also overrepresented in the review. In terms of facial EMG, patients with TBI appear to exhibit reduced activity of the corrugator muscle and diminished blink reflex, while in most studies, zygomaticus contraction did not show significant differences between TBI and controls. Interestingly, most studies measuring cardiac activity did not find significant differences between TBI and controls. Finally, one study measured salivary cortisol levels and reported no difference between patients with TBI and controls. CONCLUSION: Although disturbed EDA responses were frequently reported in patients with TBI, other measures did not consistently indicate an impairment in PR. These discrepancies could be due to the lesion pattern resulting from TBI, which could affect the PR to aversive stimuli. In addition, methodological differences concerning the measurements and their standardization as well as the characteristics of the patients may also be involved in these discrepancies. We propose methodological recommendations for the use of multiple and simultaneous PR measurements and standardization. Future research should converge toward a common methodology in terms of physiological data analysis to improve inter-study comparisons.