Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Background Perception is the ability to understand information from our senses. It allows us to experience and meaningfully interact with our environment. A stroke may impair perception in up to 70% of stroke survivors, leading to distress, increased dependence on others, and poorer quality of life. Interventions to address perceptual disorders may include assessment and screening, rehabilitation, non‐invasive brain stimulation, pharmacological and surgical approaches. Objectives To assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at perceptual disorders after stroke compared to no intervention or control (placebo, standard care, attention control), on measures of performance in activities of daily living. Search methods We searched the trials registers of the Cochrane Stroke Group, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and three other databases to August 2021. We also searched trials and research registers, reference lists of studies, handsearched journals, and contacted authors. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adult stroke survivors with perceptual disorders. We defined perception as the specific mental functions of recognising and interpreting sensory stimuli and included hearing, taste, touch, smell, somatosensation, and vision. Our definition of perception excluded visual field deficits, neglect/inattention, and pain. Data collection and analysis One review author assessed titles, with two review authors independently screening abstracts and full‐text articles for eligibility. One review author extracted, appraised, and entered data, which were checked by a second author. We assessed risk of bias (ROB) using the ROB‐1 tool, and quality of evidence using GRADE. A stakeholder group, comprising stroke survivors, carers, and healthcare professionals, was involved in this review update. Main results We identified 18 eligible RCTs involving 541 participants. The trials addressed touch (three trials, 70 participants), somatosensory (seven trials, 196 participants) and visual perception disorders (seven trials, 225 participants), with one (50 participants) exploring mixed touch‐somatosensory disorders. None addressed stroke‐related hearing, taste, or smell perception disorders. All but one examined the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions; the exception evaluated non‐invasive brain stimulation. For our main comparison of active intervention versus no treatment or control, one trial reported our primary outcome of performance in activities of daily living (ADL): Somatosensory disorders : one trial (24 participants) compared an intervention with a control intervention and reported an ADL measure. Touch perception disorder: no trials measuring ADL compared an intervention with no treatment or with a control intervention. Visu...
Background Perception is the ability to understand information from our senses. It allows us to experience and meaningfully interact with our environment. A stroke may impair perception in up to 70% of stroke survivors, leading to distress, increased dependence on others, and poorer quality of life. Interventions to address perceptual disorders may include assessment and screening, rehabilitation, non‐invasive brain stimulation, pharmacological and surgical approaches. Objectives To assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at perceptual disorders after stroke compared to no intervention or control (placebo, standard care, attention control), on measures of performance in activities of daily living. Search methods We searched the trials registers of the Cochrane Stroke Group, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and three other databases to August 2021. We also searched trials and research registers, reference lists of studies, handsearched journals, and contacted authors. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adult stroke survivors with perceptual disorders. We defined perception as the specific mental functions of recognising and interpreting sensory stimuli and included hearing, taste, touch, smell, somatosensation, and vision. Our definition of perception excluded visual field deficits, neglect/inattention, and pain. Data collection and analysis One review author assessed titles, with two review authors independently screening abstracts and full‐text articles for eligibility. One review author extracted, appraised, and entered data, which were checked by a second author. We assessed risk of bias (ROB) using the ROB‐1 tool, and quality of evidence using GRADE. A stakeholder group, comprising stroke survivors, carers, and healthcare professionals, was involved in this review update. Main results We identified 18 eligible RCTs involving 541 participants. The trials addressed touch (three trials, 70 participants), somatosensory (seven trials, 196 participants) and visual perception disorders (seven trials, 225 participants), with one (50 participants) exploring mixed touch‐somatosensory disorders. None addressed stroke‐related hearing, taste, or smell perception disorders. All but one examined the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions; the exception evaluated non‐invasive brain stimulation. For our main comparison of active intervention versus no treatment or control, one trial reported our primary outcome of performance in activities of daily living (ADL): Somatosensory disorders : one trial (24 participants) compared an intervention with a control intervention and reported an ADL measure. Touch perception disorder: no trials measuring ADL compared an intervention with no treatment or with a control intervention. Visu...
Emoxypine (ethylmethylhydroxypyridine) is a synthetic derivative of vitamin B6. Emoxypine succinate is a registered drug in Russia and Ukraine under various trade names including Mexidol, Mexicor, and Armadin Long. Mexidol demonstrates antihypoxic and anti‐ischemic effects and also modulates metabolism. The use of Mexidol by Russian athletes has been confirmed in the past. Current use by athletes is unknown as this drug is not monitored or included in drug testing protocol. Metabotropic and antihypoxic effects of Mexidol were compared to the effects of meldonium or trimetazidine, both of which are included on the World Anti‐Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List in category S4.4. Metabolic Modulators. The conjugation of emoxypine with succinate elevates the therapeutic effectiveness of the Mexidol formulation as succinic acid itself has important impacts to consider despite being a common food additive and drug excipient. Other succinic acid salts like ammonium succinate, found as dietary supplement, have been patented as performance enhancers. Available research on healthy subjects suggests that combinations of selected 3‐substituted pyridine derivatives with succinate including Mexidol and a related drug Cytoflavin can enhance the performance of athletes. Cytoflavin is a multi‐component formula containing meglumine sodium succinate, nicotinamide (vitamin B3), inosine (riboxin), and riboflavin. Other related succinate‐based drugs include Remaxol, Reamberin, and Cogitum. Mexidol and Cytoflavin and related substances exhibit similar biological effects as drugs on the WADA Prohibited List, and if they are used for performance enhancement by athletes, they could be worthy of consideration as prohibited substances in sport.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.