3 research outputs found

    Prism Adaptation in Rehabilitation? No Additional Effects of Prism Adaptation on Neglect Recovery in the Subacute Phase Poststroke

    Get PDF
    Background. Patients with neglect ignore or respond slower to contralesional stimuli. Neglect negatively influences independence in activities of daily living (ADL). Prism adaptation (PA) is one of the most frequently studied treatments, yet there is little evidence regarding positive effects on neglect behavior in ADL. Objective. To assess whether PA in the subacute phase ameliorates neglect in situations of varying complexity. Methods. A total of 70 neglect patients admitted for inpatient stroke rehabilitation received either PA or sham adaptation (SA) for 2 weeks, with full access to standard treatment. There were 7 time-dependent measurements (baseline and 1-4, 6, and 14 weeks after start of treatment). The primary outcome was change of neglect as observed during basic ADL with the Catherine Bergego Scale (CBS). Secondary outcomes were changes in performance on a dynamic multitask (ie, the Mobility Assessment Course [MAC]) and a static paper-and-pencil task (ie, a shape cancellation task [SC]). Results. In all, 34 patients received PA and 35 SA. There were significant time-dependent improvements in performance as measured with the CBS, MAC, and SC (all F > 15.57; P <.001). There was no significant difference in magnitude of improvement between groups on the CBS, MAC, and SC (all F < 2.54; P >.113]. Conclusions. No beneficial effects of PA over SA in the subacute phase poststroke were observed, which was comparable for situations of varying complexity. Heterogeneity of the syndrome, time post–stroke onset, and the content of treatment as usual are discussed. Basic knowledge on subtypes and recovery patterns would aid the development of tailored treatment

    Prism Adaptation in Rehabilitation? No Additional Effects of Prism Adaptation on Neglect Recovery in the Subacute Phase Poststroke : A Randomized Controlled Trial

    No full text
    Background. Patients with neglect ignore or respond slower to contralesional stimuli. Neglect negatively influences independence in activities of daily living (ADL). Prism adaptation (PA) is one of the most frequently studied treatments, yet there is little evidence regarding positive effects on neglect behavior in ADL. Objective. To assess whether PA in the subacute phase ameliorates neglect in situations of varying complexity. Methods. A total of 70 neglect patients admitted for inpatient stroke rehabilitation received either PA or sham adaptation (SA) for 2 weeks, with full access to standard treatment. There were 7 time-dependent measurements (baseline and 1-4, 6, and 14 weeks after start of treatment). The primary outcome was change of neglect as observed during basic ADL with the Catherine Bergego Scale (CBS). Secondary outcomes were changes in performance on a dynamic multitask (ie, the Mobility Assessment Course [MAC]) and a static paper-and-pencil task (ie, a shape cancellation task [SC]). Results. In all, 34 patients received PA and 35 SA. There were significant time-dependent improvements in performance as measured with the CBS, MAC, and SC (all F > 15.57; P .113]. Conclusions. No beneficial effects of PA over SA in the subacute phase poststroke were observed, which was comparable for situations of varying complexity. Heterogeneity of the syndrome, time post–stroke onset, and the content of treatment as usual are discussed. Basic knowledge on subtypes and recovery patterns would aid the development of tailored treatment

    Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Research Integrity

    Get PDF
    CITATION: O’Brien, S. P., et al. 2016. Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Research Integrity. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1:9, doi:10.1186/s41073-016-0012-9.The original publication is available at https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.comThese Proceedings contain the abstracts of the presentations given at the 4th World Conference in concurrent sessions, partner symposia, and poster sessions. Also included are summaries of the discussions in three focus tracks, which allowed delegates to consider and work on questions about the roles of funders, institutions, and countries in improving research systems and strengthening research integrity. Videos of the plenary presentations are available at the conference website (www.wcri2015.org).https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-016-0012-
    corecore