000912536 001__ 912536
000912536 005__ 20240429104858.0
000912536 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1186/s42466-022-00211-x
000912536 0247_ $$2Handle$$a2128/33048
000912536 0247_ $$2pmid$$a36154935
000912536 0247_ $$2WOS$$aWOS:001166769500046
000912536 037__ $$aFZJ-2022-05709
000912536 082__ $$a610
000912536 1001_ $$00000-0003-1779-4719$$aLatarnik, S.$$b0$$eCorresponding author
000912536 245__ $$aThe impact of apraxia and neglect on early rehabilitation outcome after stroke
000912536 260__ $$a[London]$$bBioMed Central$$c2022
000912536 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000912536 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000912536 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1670913474_17645
000912536 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000912536 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000912536 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000912536 520__ $$aBackgroundThis study aims to characterize the impact of apraxia and visuospatial neglect on stroke patients’ cognitive and functional outcomes during early rehabilitation. Prior work implies an unfavorable effect of visuospatial neglect on rehabilitation; however, previous findings remain ambiguous and primarily considered long-term effects. Even less is known about the impact of apraxia on rehabilitation outcomes. Although clinicians agree on the significance of the first few weeks after stroke for the course of rehabilitation, studies exploring the impact of neglect and apraxia in this early rehabilitation period remain scarce.MethodsBased on a screening of 515 hospitalized stroke patients from an early rehabilitation ward, 150 stroke patients (75 left-hemispheric strokes, 75 right hemispheric strokes) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in this observational, longitudinal study. The patients’ cognitive and functional statuses were documented at admission to the early rehabilitation ward and discharge. Also, detailed apraxia and neglect assessments were performed at midterm. The predictive values of age and apraxia and neglect severity (as reflected in two components from a principal component analysis of the neglect and apraxia assessments) for cognitive and functional outcomes at discharge were evaluated by multiple regression analyses.ResultsBesides the expected influence of the respective variables at admission, we observed a significant effect of apraxia severity on the cognitive outcome at discharge. Moreover, neglect severity predicted the Early Rehabilitation Barthel Index (Frühreha-Barthel-Index) at discharge. Supplementary moderator analysis revealed a differential effect of neglect severity on the cognitive outcome depending on the affected hemisphere.ConclusionData indicate a strong association between apraxia and visuospatial neglect and early rehabilitation outcomes after stroke.
000912536 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5251$$a5251 - Multilevel Brain Organization and Variability (POF4-525)$$cPOF4-525$$fPOF IV$$x0
000912536 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5252$$a5252 - Brain Dysfunction and Plasticity (POF4-525)$$cPOF4-525$$fPOF IV$$x1
000912536 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, Journals: juser.fz-juelich.de
000912536 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aStahl, J.$$b1
000912536 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131745$$aVossel, S.$$b2
000912536 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)161406$$aGrefkes, C.$$b3
000912536 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131720$$aFink, G. R.$$b4
000912536 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131748$$aWeiss-Blankenhorn, Peter$$b5
000912536 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2947493-0$$a10.1186/s42466-022-00211-x$$gVol. 4, no. 1, p. 46$$n1$$p46$$tNeurological research and practice$$v4$$x2524-3489$$y2022
000912536 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/912536/files/PDF.pdf$$yOpenAccess
000912536 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:912536$$pdnbdelivery$$pdriver$$pVDB$$popen_access$$popenaire
000912536 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$60000-0003-1779-4719$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b0$$kFZJ
000912536 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131745$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b2$$kFZJ
000912536 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)161406$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b3$$kFZJ
000912536 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131720$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b4$$kFZJ
000912536 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131748$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b5$$kFZJ
000912536 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-525$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-520$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-500$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$9G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5251$$aDE-HGF$$bKey Technologies$$lNatural, Artificial and Cognitive Information Processing$$vDecoding Brain Organization and Dysfunction$$x0
000912536 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-525$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-520$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-500$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$9G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5252$$aDE-HGF$$bKey Technologies$$lNatural, Artificial and Cognitive Information Processing$$vDecoding Brain Organization and Dysfunction$$x1
000912536 9141_ $$y2022
000912536 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBY4$$2HGFVOC$$aCreative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0
000912536 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0510$$2StatID$$aOpenAccess
000912536 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2022-11-23
000912536 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal$$d2019-05-24T10:38:19Z
000912536 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ$$d2019-05-24T10:38:19Z
000912536 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Blind peer review$$d2019-05-24T10:38:19Z
000912536 920__ $$lyes
000912536 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)INM-3-20090406$$kINM-3$$lKognitive Neurowissenschaften$$x0
000912536 980__ $$ajournal
000912536 980__ $$aVDB
000912536 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)INM-3-20090406
000912536 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED
000912536 9801_ $$aFullTexts