Objective To examine the impact of spatial neglect on rehabilitation outcome, risk of falls, and discharge disposition in stroke survivors. Design Inception cohort Setting Inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) Participants 108 individuals with unilateral brain damage after their first stroke were assessed at the times of IRF admission and discharge. At admission, 74 of them (68.5%) demonstrated symptoms of spatial neglect, as measured with the Kessler Foundation Neglect Assessment Process (KF-NAP™). Interventions Usual and standard IRF care. Main Outcome Measures Functional Independence Measure (FIM™), Conley Scale, number of falls, length of stay (LOS), and discharge disposition. Results The greater severity of spatial neglect (higher KF-NAP scores) at IRF admission, the lower FIM scores at admission as well as at discharge. Higher KF-NAP scores also correlated with greater LOS and slower FIM improvement rate. The presence of spatial neglect (KF-NAP > 0), but not Conley Scale scores, predicted falls such that participants with spatial neglect fell 6.5 times more often than those without symptoms. More severe neglect, by KF-NAP scores at IRF admission, reduced the likelihood of returning home at discharge. A model that took spatial neglect and other demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical factors into account predicted home discharge. Rapid FIM improvement during IRF stay and lower annual income level were significant predictors of home discharge. Conclusions Spatial neglect following a stroke is a prevalent problem, and may negatively affect rehabilitation outcome, risk of falls, and length of hospital stay.

Objective To explore the factor structure of the Kessler Foundation Neglect Assessment Process (KF-NAP), and evaluate the prevalence and clinical significance of spatial neglect among stroke survivors. Design Inception cohort. Setting Inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF). Participants 121 participants with unilateral brain damage from their first stroke were assessed within 72 hours of admission to an IRF, and 108 were assessed again within 72 hours before IRF discharge. Interventions Usual and standard IRF care. Main Outcome Measures During each assessment session, occupational therapists measured patients’ functions with the KF-NAP, Functional Independence Measure (FIM™) and Barthel Index (BI). Results The KF-NAP showed excellent internal consistency with a single-factor structure. The exploratory factor analysis revealed the KF-NAP to be unique from both the FIM and BI even though all three scales were correlated. 67.8% of the participants at admission and 47.2% at discharge presented with symptoms of spatial neglect (KF-NAP > 0). Participants showing the disorder at IRF admission were hospitalized longer than those showing no symptoms. Among those presenting with symptoms, the regression analysis showed that the KF-NAP scores at admission negatively predicted FIM scores at discharge, after controlling for age, FIM at admission, and length of stay. Conclusions The KF-NAP uniquely quantifies symptoms of spatial neglect by measuring functional difficulties that are not captured by the FIM or BI. Using the KF-NAP to measure spatial neglect, we found the disorder persistent after inpatient rehabilitation, and replicated previous findings showing that spatial neglect adversely affects rehabilitation outcome even after prolonged IRF care.

Spatial neglect is a debilitating post-stroke neurocognitive disorder, associated with longer hospitalization and worse rehabilitation outcomes. Prior literature suggests a high prevalence of this disorder, but in reality clinicians have difficulty reliably identifying affected survivors. This discrepancy may result from suboptimal use of validated neglect assessment procedures. In this article, we suggest a validated assessment tool, sensitive to identify neglect and its functional consequences, the Catherine Bergego Scale (CBS). We provide detailed item-by-item CBS instructions for observation and scoring: the Kessler Foundation Neglect Assessment Process (KF-NAP). We describe a unique attribute of the CBS and the KF-NAP: rehabilitation researchers may be able to use them to measure both ecological outcomes, and specific, separable perceptual-attentional and motor-exploratory spatial behaviors.

Spatial neglect has profound implications for quality of life after stroke, yet we lack consensus for screening/diagnosing this heterogeneous syndrome. Our first step in a multi-stage research programme aimed to determine which neglect tests are used (within four categories: cognitive, functional, neurological and neuroimaging/neuromodulation), by which stroke clinicians, in which countries, and whether choice is by professional autonomy or institutional policy. 454 clinicians responded to an online survey: 12 professions (e.g., 39% were occupational therapists) from 33 countries (e.g., 38% from the UK). Multifactorial logistic regression suggested inter-professional differences but fewer differences between countries (Italy was an outlier). Cognitive tests were used by 82% (particularly by psychologists, cancellation and drawing were most popular); 80% used functional assessments (physiotherapists were most likely). 20% (mainly physicians, from Italy) used neuroimaging/ neuromodulation. Professionals largely reported clinical autonomy in their choices. Respondents agreed on the need for a combined approach to screening and further training. This study raises awareness of the translation gap between theory and practice. These findings lay an important foundation to ARTICLE HISTORY

We conducted a review to determine the effectiveness of interventions to improve occupational performance in people with motor impairments after stroke as part of the American Occupational Therapy Association's Evidence-Based Practice Project. One hundred forty-nine studies met inclusion criteria. Findings related to key outcomes from select interventions are presented. Results suggest that a variety of effective interventions are available to improve occupational performance after stroke. Evidence suggests that repetitive task practice, constraint-induced or modified constraint-induced movement therapy, strengthening and exercise, mental practice, virtual reality, mirror therapy, and action observation can improve upper-extremity function, balance and mobility, and/or activity and participation. Commonalities among several of the effective interventions include the use of goal-directed, individualized tasks that promote frequent repetitions of task-related or task-specific movements.

Vision impairments are highly prevalent after acquired brain injury (ABI). Conceptual models that focus on constructing intellectual frameworks greatly facilitate comprehension and implementation of practice guidelines in an interprofessional setting. The purpose of this article is to provide a review of the vision literature in ABI, describe a conceptual model for vision rehabilitation, explain its potential clinical inferences, and discuss its translation into rehabilitation across multiple practice settings and disciplines.

This exploratory study suggests that spatial neglect may heighten caregivers' burden and stress levels. Future studies with a large sample size are required.

Background Current knowledge about spatial neglect and its impact on rehabilitation mostly originates from stroke studies. Objective To examine the impact of spatial neglect on rehabilitation outcome in individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Methods The retrospective study included 156 consecutive patients with TBI (73 women; median age = 69.5 years; interquartile range = 50-81 years) at an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF). We examined whether the presence of spatial neglect affected the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) scores, length of stay, or discharge disposition. Based on the available medical records, we also explored whether spatial neglect was associated with tactile sensation or muscle strength asymmetry in the extremities and whether specific brain injuries or lesions predicted spatial neglect. Results In all, 30.1% (47 of 156) of the sample had spatial neglect. Sex, age, severity of TBI, or time postinjury did not differ between patients with and without spatial neglect. In comparison to patients without spatial neglect, patients with the disorder stayed in IRF 5 days longer, had lower FIM scores at discharge, improved slower in both Cognitive and Motor FIM scores, and might have less likelihood of return home. In addition, left-sided neglect was associated with asymmetric strength in the lower extremities, specifically left weaker than the right. Finally, brain injury-induced mass effect predicted left-sided neglect. Conclusions Spatial neglect is common following TBI, impedes rehabilitation progress in both motor and cognitive domains, and prolongs length of stay. Future research is needed for linking specific traumatic injuries and lesioned networks to spatial neglect and related impairment.