The Multi-Modal Evaluation of Sensory Sensitivity (MESSY): Assessing a commonly missed symptom of acquired brain injury.

Objective: Sensory hypersensitivity is common after acquired brain injury. Since appropriate diagnostic tools are lacking, these complaints are overlooked by clinicians and available literature is limited to light and noise hypersensitivity after concussion. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of sensory hypersensitivity in other modalities and after other types of brain injury. Method: We developed the Multi-Modal Evaluation of Sensory Sensitivity (MESSY), a patient-friendly questionnaire that assesses sensory sensitivity across multiple sensory modalities. 818 neurotypical adults (mean age = 49; 244 male) and 341 chronic acquired brain injury patients (including stroke, traumatic brain injury, and brain tumour patients) (mean age = 56; 126 male) completed the MESSY online. Results: The MESSY had a high validity and reliability in neurotypical adults. Post-injury sensory hypersensitivity (examined using open-ended questions) was reported by 76% of the stroke patients, 89% of the traumatic brain injury patients, and 82% of the brain tumour patients. These complaints occurred across all modalities with multisensory, visual, and auditory hypersensitivity being the most prevalent. Patients with post-injury sensory hypersensitivity reported a higher sensory sensitivity severity on the multiple-choice items of the MESSY as compared to neurotypical adults and acquired brain injury patients without post-injury sensory hypersensitivity (across all sensory modalities) (effect sizes (partial eta squared) ranged from .06 to .22). Conclusions: These results show that sensory hypersensitivity is prevalent after different types of acquired brain injury as well as across several sensory modalities. The MESSY can improve recognition of these symptoms and facilitate further research.

The sustained attention to response task: Validation of a non-numerical parallel form.

Many activities in daily life rely on the ability to continuously keep attention on task requirements. Patients with acquired brain injury often suffer from deficits in sustained attention that impact quality of life and complicate rehabilitation. The sustained attention to response task (SART) is a commonly used go/no-go task in the assessment of sustained attention. However, its feasibility for patients with acquired brain injury could be questioned considering deficits in alphanumerical processing following brain damage. We investigated whether a SART with sinusoidal gratings instead of digits can be used to assess sustained attention. The Gratings SART and Digits SART were administered in a random and fixed sequence to 48 cognitively healthy participants. Performance of the neurotypical individuals on the random and fixed Gratings SART was only moderately different from and correlated with performance on the random and fixed Digits SART. As a proof of concept, the SARTs were also administered to 11 cases with acquired brain injury. Performance in the random and fixed variants of both the Gratings SART and Digits SART was sensitive to cognitive impairments of cases with acquired brain injury. In conclusion, the SART with sinusoidal gratings holds promise as a tool to (re-)assess sustained attention in clinical practice. Further research is critical to investigate whether its performance accurately predicts sustained attention in daily life since we failed to find a significant correlation between performance on any of the SARTs and a self-reported measure of sustained attention.

The Neuroanatomy of Poststroke Subjective Sensory Hypersensitivity.

BACKGROUND: Although subjective sensory hypersensitivity is prevalent after stroke, it is rarely recognized by health care providers, and its neural mechanisms are largely unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the neuroanatomy of poststroke subjective sensory hypersensitivity as well as the sensory modalities in which subjective sensory hypersensitivity can occur by conducting both a systematic literature review and a multiple case study of patients with subjective sensory hypersensitivity. METHOD: For the systematic review, we searched three databases (Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus) for empirical articles discussing the neuroanatomy of poststroke subjective sensory hypersensitivity in humans. We assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the case reports critical appraisal tool and summarized the results using a qualitative synthesis. For the multiple case study, we administered a patient-friendly sensory sensitivity questionnaire to three individuals with a subacute right-hemispheric stroke and a matched control group and delineated brain lesions on a clinical brain scan. RESULTS: Our systematic literature search resulted in four studies (describing eight stroke patients), all of which linked poststroke subjective sensory hypersensitivity to insular lesions. The results of our multiple case study indicated that all three stroke patients reported an atypically high sensitivity to different sensory modalities. These patients' lesions overlapped with the right anterior insula, the claustrum, and the Rolandic operculum. CONCLUSION: Both our systematic literature review and our multiple case study provide preliminary evidence for a role of the insula in poststroke subjective sensory hypersensitivity and suggest that poststroke subjective sensory hypersensitivity can occur in different sensory modalities.

Sensory sensitivity after acquired brain injury: A systematic review.

Patients with acquired brain injury frequently report experiencing sensory stimuli as abnormally under- (sensory hyposensitivity) or overwhelming (sensory hypersensitivity). Although they can negatively impact daily functioning, these symptoms are poorly understood. To provide an overview of the current evidence on atypical sensory sensitivity after acquired brain injury, we conducted a systematic literature review. The primary aim of the review was to investigate the behavioural and neural mechanisms that are associated with self-reported sensory sensitivity. Studies were included when they studied sensory sensitivity in acquired brain injury populations, and excluded when they were not written in English, consisted of non-empirical research, did not study human subjects, studied pain, related sensory sensitivity to peripheral injury or studied patients with a neurodegenerative disorder, meningitis, encephalitis or a brain tumour. The Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus databases were searched for appropriate studies. A qualitative synthesis of the results of the 81 studies that were included suggests that abnormal sensory thresholds and a reduced information processing speed are candidate behavioural mechanisms of atypical subjective sensory sensitivity after acquired brain injury. Furthermore, there was evidence for an association between subjective sensory sensitivity and structural grey or white matter abnormalities, and to functional abnormalities in sensory cortices. However, further research is needed to explore the causation of atypical sensory sensitivity. In addition, there is a need for the development of adequate diagnostic tools. This can significantly advance the quantity and quality of research on the prevalence, aetiology, prognosis and treatment of these symptoms.