Spatial Neglect: An Exploration of Clinical Assessment Behaviour in Stroke Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: There is a large gap between evidence-based recommendations for spatial neglect assessment and clinical practice in stroke rehabilitation. We aimed to describe factors that may contribute to this gap, clinician perceptions of an ideal assessment tool, and potential implementation strategies to change clinical practice in this area. DESIGN: Qualitative focus group investigation. Focus group questions were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework and asked participants to describe their experiences and perceptions of spatial neglect assessment. SETTING: Online stroke rehabilitation educational bootcamp. PARTICIPANTS: A sample of 23 occupational therapists, three physiotherapists, and one orthoptist that attended the bootcamp. INTERVENTION: Prior to their focus group, participants watched an hour-long educational session about spatial neglect. MAIN MEASURES: A deductive analysis with the Theoretical Domains Framework was used to describe perceived determinants of clinical spatial neglect assessment. An inductive thematic analysis was used to describe perceptions of an ideal assessment tool and practice-change strategies in this area. RESULTS: Participants reported that their choice of spatial neglect assessment was influenced by a belief that it would positively impact the function of people with stroke. However, a lack of knowledge about spatial neglect assessment appeared to drive low clinical use of standardised functional assessments. Participants recommended open-source online education involving a multidisciplinary team, with live-skill practice for the implementation of spatial neglect assessment tools. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that clinicians prefer functional assessments of spatial neglect, but multiple factors such as knowledge, training, and policy change are required to enable their translation to clinical practice.

A study of prisms and therapy in attention loss after stroke (SPATIAL): A feasibility randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate feasibility and acceptability of prism adaptation training for people with inattention (spatial neglect), early after stroke, during usual care. DESIGN: Phase II feasibility randomised controlled trial with 3:1 stratified allocation to standard occupational therapy with or without intervention, and nested process evaluation. SETTING: Ten hospital sites providing in-patient stroke services. PARTICIPANTS: Screened positive for inattention more than one-week post-stroke; informal carers. Occupational therapists participated in qualitative interviews. INTERVENTION: Adjunctive prism adaptation training at the start of standard occupational therapy sessions for three weeks. MAIN MEASURES: Feasibility measures included recruitment and retention rates, intervention fidelity and attrition. Outcomes collected at baseline, 3 weeks and 12 weeks tested measures including Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living Scale. Acceptability was explored through qualitative interviews and structured questions. RESULTS: Eighty (31%) patients were eligible, 57 (71%) consented, 54 randomised (40:13, +1 exclusion) and 39 (74%) completed 12-week outcomes. Treatment fidelity was good: participants received median eight intervention sessions (IQR: 5, 12) lasting 4.7 min (IQR: 4.1, 5.0). All six serious adverse events were unrelated. There was no signal that patients allocated to intervention did better than controls. Twenty five of 35 recruited carers provided outcomes with excellent data completeness. Therapists, patients and carers found prism adaptation training acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible and acceptable to conduct a high-quality definitive trial of prism adaptation training within occupational therapy early after stroke in usual care setting, but difficult to justify given no sign of benefit over standard occupational therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.isrctn.com/ Ref ISRCTN88395268.

Rapid screening for neglect following stroke: A systematic search and European Academy of Neurology recommendations.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Unilateral neglect is a common cognitive disorder following stroke. Neglect has a significant impact on functional outcomes, so it is important to detect. However, there is no consensus on which are the best screening tests to administer to detect neglect in time-limited clinical environments. METHODS: Members of the European Academy of Neurology Scientific Panel on Higher Cortical Functions, neuropsychologists, occupational therapists, and researchers produced recommendations for primary and secondary tests for bedside neglect testing based on a rigorous literature review, data extraction, online consensus meeting, and subsequent iterations. RESULTS: A total of 512 articles were screened, and 42 were included. These reported data from 3367 stroke survivors assessed using 62 neglect screens. Tests were grouped into cancellation, line bisection, copying, reading/writing, and behavioral. Cancellation tasks were most frequently used (97.6% of studies), followed by bisection, copying, behavioral, and reading/writing assessments. The panel recommended a cancellation test as the primary screening test if there is time to administer only one test. One of several cancellation tests might be used, depending on availability. If time permits, one or more of line bisection, figure copying, and baking tray task were recommended as secondary tests. Finally, if a functional and ecological test is feasible, the Catherine Bergego Scale was recommended. Overall, the literature suggests that no single test on its own is sufficient to exclude a diagnosis of neglect. Therefore, the panel recommended that multiple neglect tests should be used whenever possible. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides consensus recommendations for rapid bedside detection of neglect in real-world, clinical environments.

Current clinical practice in the screening and diagnosis of spatial neglect post-stroke: Findings from a multidisciplinary international survey.

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 subsequent collaborative action between clinicians, researchers and stroke survivors to reach consensus on screening and diagnostic measures. The immediate next step is a review of the measures' psychometric properties.

Non-invasive brain stimulation in Stroke patients (NIBS): A prospective randomized open blinded end-point (PROBE) feasibility trial using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in post-stroke hemispatial neglect.

Up to 80% of people who experience a right-hemisphere stroke suffer from hemispatial neglect. This syndrome is debilitating and impedes rehabilitation. We carried out a clinical feasibility trial of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and a behavioural rehabilitation programme, alone or in combination, in patients with neglect. Patients >4 weeks post right hemisphere stroke were randomized to 10 sessions of tDCS, 10 sessions of a behavioural intervention, combined intervention, or a control task. Primary outcomes were recruitment and retention rates, with secondary outcomes effect sizes on measures of neglect and quality of life, assessed directly after the interventions, and at 6 months follow up. Of 288 confirmed stroke cases referred (representing 7% of confirmed strokes), we randomized 8% (0.6% of stroke cases overall). The largest number of exclusions (91/288 (34%)) were due to medical comorbidities that prevented patients from undergoing 10 intervention sessions. We recruited 24 patients over 29 months, with 87% completing immediate post-intervention and 67% 6 month evaluations. We established poor feasibility of a clinical trial requiring repeated hospital-based tDCS within a UK hospital healthcare setting, either with or without behavioural training, over a sustained time period. Future trials should consider intensity, duration and location of tDCS neglect interventions.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02401724.

Geriatrics Screening and Assessment.

Geriatric screening and assessment allows clinicians to care for older patients in an efficient, patient-centered manner. This framework includes standard screening questions that may trigger the use of standard geriatric assessment tools and/or other interventions. Additionally, it serves to complement the history and physical examination, and is critical for maximizing the health, function, safety, and quality of life of older patients.

Prevention of perioperative venous thromboembolism in pediatric patients: Guidelines from the Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (APAGBI).

The Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (APAGBI) Guidelines Working Group on Thromboprophylaxis in Children has reviewed the literature and where possible provided advice on the care of children in the perioperative period. Areas reviewed include the incidence of perioperative venous thromboembolism (VTE), risk factors, evidence for mechanical and chemical prophylaxis, and complications. Safe practice of regional anesthesia with anticoagulant prophylaxis is detailed. In summary, there are few areas of strong evidence. Routine prophylaxis cannot be recommended for young children. Postpubertal adolescents (approximately 13 years and over) are at a slightly increased risk of VTE and should be assessed for prophylaxis and may warrant intervention if other risk factors are present. However, the incidence of VTE is significantly lower than in the adult population. This special interest review presents a summary and discussion of the key recommendations, a decision-making algorithm and a risk assessment chart. For the full guideline, go to www.apagbi.org.uk/publications/apa-guidelines.

No Interaction between tDCS Current Strength and Baseline Performance: A Conceptual Replication.

Several recent studies have reported non-linear effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), which has been attributed to an interaction between the stimulation parameters (e.g., current strength, duration) and the neural state of the cortex being stimulated (e.g., indexed by baseline performance ability, age) (see Fertonani and Miniussi, 2016). We have recently described one such non-linear interaction between current strength and baseline performance on a visuospatial attention (landmark) task (Benwell et al., 2015). In this previous study, we induced a small overall rightward shift of spatial attention across 38 participants using bi-hemispheric tDCS applied for 20 min (concurrent left posterior parietal (P5) anode and right posterior parietal (P6) cathode) relative to a sham protocol. Importantly, this shift in bias was driven by a state-dependent interaction between current intensity and the discrimination sensitivity of the participant at baseline (pre-stimulation) for the landmark task. Individuals with high discrimination sensitivity (HDS) shifted rightward in response to low- (1 mA) but not high-intensity (2 mA) tDCS, whereas individuals with low discrimination sensitivity (LDS) shifted rightward with high- but not low-intensity stimulation. However, in Benwell et al. (2015) current strength was applied as a between-groups factor, where half of the participants received 1 mA and half received 2 mA tDCS, thus we were unable to compare high and low-intensity tDCS directly within each individual. Here we aimed to replicate these findings using a within-group design. Thirty young adults received 15 min of 1 and 2 mA tDCS, and a sham protocol, each on different days, to test the concept of an interaction between baseline performance and current strength. We found no overall rightward shift of spatial attention with either current strength, and no interaction between performance and current strength. These results provide further evidence of low replicability of non-invasive brain stimulation protocols, and the need for further attempts to replicate the key experimental findings within this field.

An investigation of the effect of scaling-induced surface roughness on bacterial adhesion in common fixed dental restorative materials.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Bacterial plaque must be routinely removed from teeth, adjacent structures, and prostheses. However, the removal of this plaque can inadvertently increase the risk of future bacterial adhesion. PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to assess the change in the surface roughness of 3 different surfaces after dental prophylactic instrumentation and how this influenced bacterial adhesion. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty specimens each of Type III gold alloy, lithium disilicate, and zirconia were fabricated in the same dimensions. The specimens were divided into 4 groups: ultrasonic scaler, stainless steel curette, prophylaxis cup, and control. Pretreatment surface roughness measurements were made with a profilometer. Surface treatments in each group were performed with a custom mechanical scaler. Posttreatment surface roughness values were measured. In turn, the specimens were inoculated with Streptococcus mutans, Lactobacillus acidophilus, and Actinomyces viscosus. Bacterial adhesion was assessed by rinsing the specimens with sterile saline to remove unattached cells. The specimens were then placed in sterile tubes with 1 mL of sterile saline. The solution was plated and quantified. Scanning electron microscopy was performed. The statistical analysis of surface roughness was completed by using repeated-measures single-factor ANOVA with a Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: The surface roughness values for gold alloy specimens increased as a result of prophylaxis cup treatment (0.221 to 0.346 Ra) (P<.01) and stainless steel curette treatment (0.264 to 1.835 Ra) (P<.01). The results for bacterial adhesion to gold alloy proved inconclusive. A quantitative comparison indicated no statistically significant differences in pretreatment and posttreatment surface roughness values for lithium disilicate and zirconia specimens. In spite of these similarities, the overall bacterial adherence values for lithium disilicate were significantly greater than those recorded for gold alloy or zirconia (P<.05). Instrumentation of the lithium disilicate and zirconia with the stainless steel curette significantly increased bacterial adhesion compared with the control (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this investigation indicate that Type III gold alloy exhibited increased surface roughness values after stainless steel curette and prophylaxis cup treatments. Zirconia was less susceptible to bacterial adhesion than lithium disilicate, and greater bacterial adhesion was found for the stainless steel curette than the other instrumentation methods.