Efficacy of home-based visuomotor feedback training in stroke patients with chronic hemispatial neglect.

Hemispatial neglect is a severe cognitive condition frequently observed after a stroke, associated with unawareness of one side of space, disability and poor long-term outcome. Visuomotor feedback training (VFT) is a neglect rehabilitation technique that involves a simple, inexpensive and feasible training of grasping-to-lift rods at the centre. We compared the immediate and long-term effects of VFT vs. a control training when delivered in a home-based setting. Twenty participants were randomly allocated to an intervention (who received VFT) or a control group (n = 10 each). Training was delivered for two sessions by an experimenter and then patients self-administered it for 10 sessions over two weeks. Outcome measures included the Behavioural Inattention Test (BIT), line bisection, Balloons Test, Landmark task, room description task, subjective straight-ahead pointing task and the Stroke Impact Scale. The measures were obtained before, immediately after the training sessions and after four-months post-training. Significantly greater short and long-term improvements were obtained after VFT when compared to control training in line bisection, BIT and spatial bias in cancellation. VFT also produced improvements on activities of daily living. We conclude that VFT is a feasible, effective, home-based rehabilitation method for neglect patients that warrants further investigation with well-designed randomised controlled trials on a large sample of patients.

Interventions for age-related visual problems in patients with stroke.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of eye problems increases with age and, consequently, so does the level of visual impairment. As the incidence of stroke also increases with age, a significant proportion of stroke patients will have age-related visual problems. It is possible that the effect of interventions for age-related visual problems may differ in the population of stroke patients compared to the wider population of older people. The interaction between the problems arising directly from stroke and those arising directly from age-related visual problems will be complex. Interventions for age-related visual problems may also be affected by the presence of other stroke-related co-morbidities. Consequently, the nature and outcome of interventions for age-related visual problems may be different in patients with stroke. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to determine if interventions for age-related visual problems improve functional ability following stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (March 2011), the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register (December 2009) and nine electronic bibliographic databases including: the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1950 to February 2011), EMBASE (1980 to February 2011), CINAHL (1982 to February 2011), AMED (1985 to February 2011) and PsycINFO (1967 to February 2011). We also searched reference lists and trials registers, handsearched journals and conference proceedings, and contacted experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials in adults after stroke, where the intervention is specifically targeted at assessing, treating or correcting age-related visual problems, or improving the ability of the patient to cope with visual impairment. Primary outcome was functional ability in activities of daily living and secondary outcomes included functional ability in extended activities of daily living, visual acuity, visual field, visual function, balance, falls, depression and anxiety, discharge destination/residence after stroke, quality of life and social isolation, adverse events and death. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened abstracts and planned to extract data and appraise trials. We planned that assessment of methodological quality would be undertaken for allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessor, method of dealing with missing data and other potential sources of bias. MAIN RESULTS: We considered 7357 titles, 460 abstracts and 85 full papers. We identified no studies for inclusion in this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are no implications for practice arising from this review. Evidence relating to the management of patients (from the general population) with age-related visual problems is available from other Cochrane reviews and is likely to be the best evidence available for making treatment decisions about individual patients. Subgroup analyses within these reviews to explore the effect of interventions for age-related visual problems in patients with stroke are recommended. We recommend that the objectives and selection criteria for this Cochrane review are amended and clarified prior to any future updates.

Interventions for visual field defects in patients with stroke.

BACKGROUND: Visual field defects are estimated to affect 20% to 57% of people who have had a stroke. Visual field defects can affect functional ability in activities of daily living (commonly affecting mobility, reading and driving), quality of life, ability to participate in rehabilitation, and depression, anxiety and social isolation following stroke. There are many interventions for visual field defects, which are proposed to work by restoring the visual field (restitution); compensating for the visual field defect by changing behaviour or activity (compensation); substituting for the visual field defect by using a device or extraneous modification (substitution); or ensuring appropriate diagnosis, referral and treatment prescription through standardised assessment or screening, or both. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of interventions for people with visual field defects after stroke. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (February 2011), the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register (December 2009) and nine electronic bibliographic databases including CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to December 2009), EMBASE (1980 to December 2009), CINAHL (1982 to December 2009), AMED (1985 to December 2009), and PsycINFO (1967 to December 2009). We also searched reference lists and trials registers, handsearched journals and conference proceedings and contacted experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials in adults after stroke, where the intervention was specifically targeted at improving the visual field defect or improving the ability of the participant to cope with the visual field loss. The primary outcome was functional ability in activities of daily living and secondary outcomes included functional ability in extended activities of daily living, reading ability, visual field measures, balance, falls, depression and anxiety, discharge destination or residence after stroke, quality of life and social isolation, visual scanning, adverse events and death. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened abstracts, extracted data and appraised trials. We undertook an assessment of methodological quality for allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessors, method of dealing with missing data, and other potential sources of bias. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen studies (344 randomised participants, 285 of whom were participants with stroke) met the inclusion criteria for this review. However, only six of these studies compared the effect of an intervention with a placebo, control or no treatment group and were included in comparisons within this review. Four studies compared the effect of scanning (compensatory) training with a control or placebo intervention. Meta-analysis demonstrated that scanning training is more effective than control or placebo at improving reading ability (three studies, 129 participants; mean difference (MD) 3.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 5.59) and visual scanning (three studies, 129 participants; MD 18.84, 95% CI 12.01 to 25.66) but that scanning may not improve visual field outcomes (two studies, 110 participants; MD -0.70, 95% CI -2.28 to 0.88). There were insufficient data to enable generalised conclusions to be made about the effectiveness of scanning training relative to control or placebo for the primary outcome of activities of daily living (one study, 33 participants). Only one study (19 participants) compared the effect of a restitutive intervention with a control or placebo intervention and only one study (39 participants) compared the effect of a substitutive intervention with a control or placebo intervention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence which supports the use of compensatory scanning training for patients with visual field defects (and possibly co-existing visual neglect) to improve scanning and reading outcomes. There is insufficient evidence to reach a conclusion about the impact of compensatory scanning training on functional activities of daily living. There is insufficient evidence to reach generalised conclusions about the benefits of visual restitution training (VRT) (restitutive intervention) or prisms (substitutive intervention) for patients with visual field defects after stroke.

Interventions for disorders of eye movement in patients with stroke.

BACKGROUND: Eye movement disorders may affect over 70% of stroke patients. These eye movement disorders can result in difficulty maintaining the normal ocular position and difficulty moving the eyes appropriately. The resulting functional disabilities include a loss of depth perception, reduced hand-to-eye co-ordination, marked difficulties with near tasks and reading and reduced ability to scan the visual environment. They can also impact on the effectiveness of rehabilitation therapy. There are a wide variety of different treatment interventions proposed for eye movement disorders after stroke. However, in the past, there has been a lack of evidence specific to the impact of interventions on the functional outcome of patients with stroke. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of interventions for eye movement disorders on functional ability following stroke. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (February 2011), the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register (December 2009) and nine electronic bibliographic databases including CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to December 2009), EMBASE (1980 to December 2009), CINAHL (1982 to December 2009), AMED (1985 to December 2009), and PsycINFO (1967 to December 2009). We also searched reference lists and trials registers, handsearched journals and conference proceedings, and contacted experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials in adults after stroke where the intervention was specifically targeted at improving the eye movement disorder or improving the ability of the participant to cope with the eye movement disorder. The primary outcome was functional ability in activities of daily living. Secondary outcomes included functional ability in extended activities of daily living, eye movement measures, balance, falls, depression or anxiety, discharge destination or residence after stroke, quality of life and social isolation, adverse events, and death. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened abstracts, extracted data and appraised trials. We undertook assessment of methodological quality for allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessor, method of dealing with missing data, and other potential sources of bias. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies (28 participants but only five were people with stroke) met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Both studies investigated pharmacological interventions for disorders of eye movement in patients with stroke. It was not appropriate to pool data and we were not able to draw conclusions from these studies. We found no other randomised studies which investigated interventions for disorders of eye movement in patients with stroke. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to reach conclusions about the effectiveness of interventions for patients with eye movement disorders after stroke. High quality research in the form of well-designed randomised trials are urgently required.

No neglect-specific deficits in reaching tasks.

It is well established that patients with hemispatial neglect present with severe visuospatial impairments, but studies that have directly investigated visuomotor control have revealed diverging results, with some studies showing that neglect patients perform relatively better on such tasks. The present study compared the visuomotor performance of patients with and without neglect after right-hemisphere stroke with those of age-matched controls. Participants were asked to point either directly towards targets or halfway between two stimuli, both with and without visual feedback during movement. Although we did not find any neglect-specific impairment, both patient groups showed increased reaction times to leftward stimuli as well as decreased accuracies for open loop leftward reaches. We argue that these findings agree with the view that neglect patients code spatial parameters for action veridically. Moreover, we suggest that lesions in the right hemisphere may cause motor deficits irrespective of the presence of neglect and we performed an initial voxel-lesion symptom analysis to assess this. Lesion-symptom analysis revealed that the reported deficits did not result from damage to neglect-associated areas alone, but were further associated with lesions to crucial nodes in the visuomotor control network (the basal ganglia as well as occipito-parietal and frontal areas).