RESUMO
Background: Concussions are often accompanied by balance disturbances. Clinically accurate evaluation systems are often expensive, large, and inaccessible to most clinicians. The Sway Balance Mobile Application (SWAY) is an accessible method to quantify balance changes. Purpose: To determine the known groups and convergent validity of the SWAY to assess balance after a concussion. Study Design: Case-Control Study. Methods: Twenty participants with acute concussion and twenty controls were recruited. At initial, one-week, and final return to activity (RTA) evaluations, all participants completed the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT-5), and balance control measured by SWAY mBESS and NeuroCom Balance Master Sensory Organization Test (SOT). Mixed model ANOVAs were used to detect differences in SWAY mBESS and NeuroCom SOT scores with time (initial, one-week, final RTA) as the within-subjects factor and group (concussed, healthy) as the between-subjects factor. Spearman's Rho correlations explored the associations between NeuroCom SOT scores, SWAY scores, SCAT-5 symptom scores, and time in days to final RTA. Results: The sampled population was predominantly male and age (20 ± 1), and BMI differences were insignificant between groups. The SWAY did not detect differences between healthy and concussed participants and did not detect change over time [F(2,40) = .114, p = 0.89; F(2,40)= .276, p =0.60]. When assessing the relationship between the SWAY and the SOT, no correlation was found at any time point (r = -0.317 to -0.062, p > 0.05). Time to RTA demonstrated a moderate correlation with both SCAT-5 symptom severity score (r = .693, p < 0.01) and SCAT-5 total symptom score (r = .611, p < 0.01) at the one-week follow-up. Conclusion: The SWAY mBESS does not appear to be a valid balance assessment for the concussed patient. The SWAY mBESS in patients with concussion failed to demonstrate convergent validity and did not demonstrate an ability to validate known groups. When assessing the time to final RTA, the one-week post-initial assessment SCAT-5 symptom severity and total scores may help determine the length of recovery in this population. Level of Evidence: Level 3.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Treatment decision making is strictly associated with the outcomes in patients with ischemic stroke who show a large core infarct. Medical care alone may result in suboptimal treatment efficacy, and endovascular treatment may be accompanied by safety issues. Whether endovascular treatment is superior to medical care is not well investigated in the clinical studies. AIM: To investigate the efficacy of endovascular treatment and drug therapy alone in mild ischemic stroke patients with large infarct cores. METHODS: Fifty patients with mild ischemic stroke and 50 patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by anterior large vessel occlusion were selected at the First Affiliated Hospital of Hebei North University between January 2021 and December 2021. Patients were divided into an endovascular therapy group and a drug therapy group according to different treatment methods. In the endovascular therapy group, there were 28 patients with minor stroke and 22 patients with large infarct cores. The drug therapy group had 22 patients with minor stroke and 28 patients with large infarct cores. The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores were collected and compared between the two groups immediately after the operation and 24 h and 7 d after the operation. The modified Rankin scale (mRS) and/or activity of daily living were assessed at hospital discharge. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in NIHSS scores between the two groups before the operation (P > 0.05). NIHSS scores were lower in the endovascular therapy group than in the drug therapy group at 24 h and 7 d after the operation and at hospital discharge (all P < 0.05). The incidence of early neurologic deterioration was significantly lower in the endovascular therapy group than in the drug therapy group (P < 0.05). At hospital discharge, the mRS score was lower in the endovascular treatment group than in the drug therapy group, and the activity of daily living score was better in the endovascular treatment group than in the drug therapy group (all P < 0.05). During a follow-up of 3 mo, 17 patients (34.0%) had good prognosis (mRS ≤ 2), 33 patients (66.0%) had poor prognosis (mRS > 2), and 11 patients (22.0%) died. In the medical treatment group, 16 patients (mRS ≤ 2) had good prognosis (32.0%), 34 patients (mRS > 2) had poor prognosis (68.0%), and 14 patients (28.0%) died. There was no significant difference in prognosis and mortality between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Endovascular therapy can improve NIHSS score and mRS score in patients with mild ischemic stroke and large infarct cores. It is suitable for clinical application.
