4.3 Article

Early neuropsychological evaluation in patients with ischaemic stroke provides valid information

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY
卷 107, 期 5, 页码 385-392

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2004.10.012

关键词

neuropsychological evaluation; early diagnostics; cognitive outcome; stroke; post-stroke depression; quality of life

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: This study describes the feasibility and validity of neuropsychological evaluation in the early stage post-stroke. Early information on cognitive functioning in stroke patients could improve discharge decision, programming of rehabilitation strategies, and better prepare proxies for the problems they can be presented with in daily life. In this explorative study, our primary focus was on the feasibility of early neuropsychological evaluation. Furthermore, we looked at the possible prognostic relevance of early examination. Patients and methods: Fifty-seven consecutive patients (age 19-80) were enrolled within 4-20 days after their first ischaemic stroke (Modified-Rankin Scale (M-RS): 2-4). Patients were re-tested after 12-24 months, and functional outcome was assessed. Results: In the early stage 44 (77%), patients could complete 82% of the administered tasks. At second evaluation, test performances improved, but a stable test profile was found with respect to abnormalities on the different tasks (P < 0.0001). Moreover, initial sum scores of all composite cognitive domains including intellectual functioning (R-2 = 0.80), language (R-2 = 0.76), memory (R-2 = 0.32), perception and visuospatial construction (R-2 = 0.60), attention and psychomotor-functioning (R-2 = 0.80) had significant predictive validity with respect to functional outcome (P < 0.001). Conclusion: This study supports the feasibility of early neuropsychological evaluation after ischaemic stroke onset and the prognostic validity for cognitive outcome in the long term. (c) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据