Spatial neglect treatment: The brain’s spatial-motor Aiming systems

Barrett, Anna M.; Goedert, Kelly M.; Carter, Alexandre R.; Chaudhari, Amit

doi:10.1080/09602011.2020.1862678

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 119 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This may lead to motor intentional and visuospatial presentations of neglect, respectively. Studies suggest that patients with aiming/motor intentional spatial neglect may experience the most benefit from PAT (23,29,38). While lesion location and aiming spatial neglect classification was not available in the current sample, given the overall severity of the sample, it is possible that the patients with severe neglect in this study had motor-intentional spatial neglect, possibly explaining their tendency to benefit more from treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Prism Adaptation Treatment of Spatial Neglect: Feasibility During Inpatient Rehabilitation and Identification of Patients Most Likely to Benefit

Gillen¹,

Harmon²,

Weil³

et al. 2022

Front. Neurol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveSpatial Neglect is prevalent among stroke survivors, yet few treatments have evidence supporting efficacy. This study examines the feasibility of Prism Adaptation Treatment (PAT) within an inpatient rehabilitation facility and the degree by which PAT improves symptoms of spatial neglect and functional independence among sub-acute survivors of right hemispheric stroke.DesignIn this retrospective cohort study, 37 right hemispheric stroke patients were identified as having received at least 4 PAT sessions during their inpatient stay. Spatial neglect and functional independence levels of patients in the PAT cohort were compared to a matched active control group comprised of rehabilitation patients receiving alternative therapies to address neglect admitted during the same time period.ResultsMost patients received the full recommended 10 sessions of PAT (average sessions completed = 8.6). A higher percentage of severe neglect patients receiving PAT (69%) displayed clinically significant gains on FIM (≥22 points) compared to those receiving alternative treatments (6%). Patients with mild or moderate neglect in the PAT cohort did not exhibit greater benefit than controls.ConclusionProvision of PAT for treatment of spatial neglect in right hemispheric stroke patients was feasible during the inpatient rehabilitation admission. Patients with severe neglect showed the most benefit from PAT.Clinical Trial RegistrationThis study was registered as a retrospective observational study on Itab Clinical Trials.gov. NCT04977219.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Prism Adaptation Treatment of Spatial Neglect: Feasibility During Inpatient Rehabilitation and Identification of Patients Most Likely to Benefit

Gillen¹,

Harmon²,

Weil³

et al. 2022

Front. Neurol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also cold water caloric stimulation might be more effective for sensory neglect in comparison to motor neglect ( 28 ). Consequently, the results of intervention studies that do not assess neglect subtypes may be invalid, indicating a combination of improvement in one subtype and no change of another type ( 29 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial Neglect Subtypes, Definitions and Assessment Tools: A Scoping Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective of this scoping review was to capture the reported definitions for the subtypes of neglect post stroke and map the range of assessment tools employed for each neglect subtype.Methods: EMBASE, Emcare, Medline, and psychINFO were searched from database inception. Searching included all allied terms and mesh headings for stroke, spatial neglect, measurement, screening tools, psychometric properties. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion. Primary studies with documented protocols of a spatial neglect tool for adults post stroke, with some aspect of validity or reliability were included. Two reviewers independently reviewed the documented protocols of each tool to determine the underlying subtypes and disagreements were resolved through discussion.Results: There were 371 articles included with 292 tools used for the screening or diagnosis of neglect. The majority of studies (67%) included a tool that did not specify the neglect subtype being assessed, therefore an analysis of the underlying subtypes for each tool is presented.Conclusions: There is no consistency with the terms used to refer to the syndrome of spatial neglect with over 200 different terms used within the included studies to refer to the syndrome as a whole or one of its subtypes. It is essential to unify the terminology and definition for each neglect subtype. There are hundreds of neglect tools available, however many are not able to differentiate presenting subtypes. It is important for clinicians and researchers to critically evaluate the neglect tools being used for the screening and diagnosis of neglect.

show abstract