Cargando…

Spatial Neglect Subtypes, Definitions and Assessment Tools: A Scoping Review

Objective: The objective of this scoping review was to capture the reported definitions for the subtypes of neglect post stroke and map the range of assessment tools employed for each neglect subtype. Methods: EMBASE, Emcare, Medline, and psychINFO were searched from database inception. Searching in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Williams, Lindy J., Kernot, Jocelyn, Hillier, Susan L., Loetscher, Tobias
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8653914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34899565
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.742365
_version_ 1784611765008465920
author Williams, Lindy J.
Kernot, Jocelyn
Hillier, Susan L.
Loetscher, Tobias
author_facet Williams, Lindy J.
Kernot, Jocelyn
Hillier, Susan L.
Loetscher, Tobias
author_sort Williams, Lindy J.
collection PubMed
description Objective: The objective of this scoping review was to capture the reported definitions for the subtypes of neglect post stroke and map the range of assessment tools employed for each neglect subtype. Methods: EMBASE, Emcare, Medline, and psychINFO were searched from database inception. Searching included all allied terms and mesh headings for stroke, spatial neglect, measurement, screening tools, psychometric properties. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion. Primary studies with documented protocols of a spatial neglect tool for adults post stroke, with some aspect of validity or reliability were included. Two reviewers independently reviewed the documented protocols of each tool to determine the underlying subtypes and disagreements were resolved through discussion. Results: There were 371 articles included with 292 tools used for the screening or diagnosis of neglect. The majority of studies (67%) included a tool that did not specify the neglect subtype being assessed, therefore an analysis of the underlying subtypes for each tool is presented. Conclusions: There is no consistency with the terms used to refer to the syndrome of spatial neglect with over 200 different terms used within the included studies to refer to the syndrome as a whole or one of its subtypes. It is essential to unify the terminology and definition for each neglect subtype. There are hundreds of neglect tools available, however many are not able to differentiate presenting subtypes. It is important for clinicians and researchers to critically evaluate the neglect tools being used for the screening and diagnosis of neglect.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8653914
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86539142021-12-09 Spatial Neglect Subtypes, Definitions and Assessment Tools: A Scoping Review Williams, Lindy J. Kernot, Jocelyn Hillier, Susan L. Loetscher, Tobias Front Neurol Neurology Objective: The objective of this scoping review was to capture the reported definitions for the subtypes of neglect post stroke and map the range of assessment tools employed for each neglect subtype. Methods: EMBASE, Emcare, Medline, and psychINFO were searched from database inception. Searching included all allied terms and mesh headings for stroke, spatial neglect, measurement, screening tools, psychometric properties. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion. Primary studies with documented protocols of a spatial neglect tool for adults post stroke, with some aspect of validity or reliability were included. Two reviewers independently reviewed the documented protocols of each tool to determine the underlying subtypes and disagreements were resolved through discussion. Results: There were 371 articles included with 292 tools used for the screening or diagnosis of neglect. The majority of studies (67%) included a tool that did not specify the neglect subtype being assessed, therefore an analysis of the underlying subtypes for each tool is presented. Conclusions: There is no consistency with the terms used to refer to the syndrome of spatial neglect with over 200 different terms used within the included studies to refer to the syndrome as a whole or one of its subtypes. It is essential to unify the terminology and definition for each neglect subtype. There are hundreds of neglect tools available, however many are not able to differentiate presenting subtypes. It is important for clinicians and researchers to critically evaluate the neglect tools being used for the screening and diagnosis of neglect. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-11-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8653914/ /pubmed/34899565 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.742365 Text en Copyright © 2021 Williams, Kernot, Hillier and Loetscher. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neurology
Williams, Lindy J.
Kernot, Jocelyn
Hillier, Susan L.
Loetscher, Tobias
Spatial Neglect Subtypes, Definitions and Assessment Tools: A Scoping Review
title Spatial Neglect Subtypes, Definitions and Assessment Tools: A Scoping Review
title_full Spatial Neglect Subtypes, Definitions and Assessment Tools: A Scoping Review
title_fullStr Spatial Neglect Subtypes, Definitions and Assessment Tools: A Scoping Review
title_full_unstemmed Spatial Neglect Subtypes, Definitions and Assessment Tools: A Scoping Review
title_short Spatial Neglect Subtypes, Definitions and Assessment Tools: A Scoping Review
title_sort spatial neglect subtypes, definitions and assessment tools: a scoping review
topic Neurology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8653914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34899565
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.742365
work_keys_str_mv AT williamslindyj spatialneglectsubtypesdefinitionsandassessmenttoolsascopingreview
AT kernotjocelyn spatialneglectsubtypesdefinitionsandassessmenttoolsascopingreview
AT hilliersusanl spatialneglectsubtypesdefinitionsandassessmenttoolsascopingreview
AT loetschertobias spatialneglectsubtypesdefinitionsandassessmenttoolsascopingreview