Deans' stroke musings: Abstract TP218: Use Of A Tablet Device application (iNeglect) to evaluate Neglect patients

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Monday, February 18, 2013

Abstract TP218: Use Of A Tablet Device application (iNeglect) to evaluate Neglect patients

But, but what about your grandma of 90 who has never used a computer or cell phone.
http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/44/2_MeetingAbstracts/ATP218
Background: Patients with unilateral neglect after the right hemispheric lesion fail to respond normally to stimuli on the left side. Several paper-based tests for detecting neglect had been widely used. Here, we developed an application that runs on a tablet device to evaluate unilateral spatial neglect and investigated its feasibility in stroke patients.
Methods: We enrolled acute ischemic stroke patients with neglect (n = 20) who had at least one of visual, auditory or tactile extinction. By comparison, stroke patients who had cortical lesions without neglect (n = 10), and healthy controls (n = 10) were recruited. The iNeglect application running on the iPad device was developed. In the table setting test of the iNeglect, the subjects were requested to drag the 12 food items on the table, and the deviation of each item from the midline was measured automatically. Line bisection tests using paper or iPad were also performed and compared.
Results: Among neglect patients, mean deviation to the right side were 2.03 ± 2.11 mm of line bisection on paper, 18.47 ± 20.89 mm of line bisection on iPad, and 15.79 ± 18.17 mm of the table setting test. Patients with neglect showed larger deviation to the right side; in line bisection on paper (compared without neglect, p = 0.016 and control, p &lt0.001), line bisection on iPad (compared without neglect, p = 0.053 and control, p = 0.009), and table setting test (0.80 ± 7.38 mm of without neglect, p = 0.004 and -2.93 ± 6.78 mm of healthy control, p = 0.001). Results of table setting test was well correlated with that of line bisection tests on paper (r = 0.487, p&lt0.001) and iPad (r = 0.511, p&lt0.001).
Conclusions: The iNeglect application was feasible in discriminating the patients with neglect and recognizing the right side deviation. The iNeglect application might be helpful to evaluate neglect patients and to objectify neurological deficit.