Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/48023
Title: Specifying time courses of subtypes of spatial neglect after stroke: Necessary or not?
Authors: Embrechts, Elissa
van der Waal, Charlotte
VAN CRIEKINGE, Tamaya 
SCHRODER, Jonas 
Lafosse, Christophe
Truijen, Steven
Saeys, Wim
Nijboer, Tanja C. W.
Issue Date: 2025
Publisher: CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
Source: Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society,
Status: Early view
Abstract: Objective: Spatial neglect is a heterogeneous post-stroke disorder with subtypes differing in reference frames, processing stages, and spatial domains. While egocentric peri-personal neglect recovery has been studied, recovery trajectories of allocentric peri-personal visuospatial and personal neglect remain unclear. This study investigated recovery time courses of egocentric and allocentric peri-personal visuospatial and personal neglect during the first 12 weeks post-stroke; whether initial severity predicts recovery and defines distinct patient clusters; and how subtypes interrelate over time.Method: Forty-one first-ever stroke patients were evaluated at weeks 3, 5, 8, and 12 post-stroke using the Broken Hearts Test, Line Bisection Test, Visuospatial Search Time Test, and Fluff Test. Recovery was analyzed using linear mixed models, clustering with Gaussian finite mixture models, and interrelationships using Spearman correlations.Results: Significant improvements occurred in egocentric and allocentric peri-personal visuospatial and personal neglect, primarily between weeks 3 and 5, followed by a plateau. The Line Bisection Test detected no changes. Higher initial severity predicted greater residual impairment. Cluster analysis identified near-normal, mild, and moderate-to-severe baseline subgroups with distinct recovery trajectories. Moderate-to-good correlations (rho = 0.33 - 0.55) emerged between egocentric and allocentric neglect at week 3 and when timepoints were pooled.Conclusion: Neglect improved mainly between weeks 3 and 5 after which recovery plateaued, mirroring motor and language recovery and suggesting a shared time-limited window. Initial severity was a determinant of recovery, highlighting the value of early severity stratification to monitor and support recovery potential after stroke. As subtypes are distinctive, assessment should include multiple neglect tests.
Notes: Embrechts, E (corresponding author), Univ Antwerp, Dept Rehabil Sci & Phys Therapy, Res Grp MOVANT, Antwerp, Belgium.; Embrechts, E (corresponding author), Revarte Rehabil Hosp, Dept Neurorehabil, Edegem, Belgium.; Embrechts, E (corresponding author), Univ Utrecht, Helmholtz Inst, Dept Expt Psychol, Utrecht, Netherlands.
elissa.embrechts@uantwerpen.be
Keywords: Visuospatial neglect;Visuospatial neglect;personal neglect;personal neglect;recovery;recovery;time course;time course;stroke;stroke;spatial neglect;spatial neglect
Document URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/48023
ISSN: 1355-6177
e-ISSN: 1469-7661
DOI: 10.1017/S1355617725101689
ISI #: 001635526000001
Rights: The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of International Neuropsychological Society. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Category: A1
Type: Journal Contribution
Appears in Collections:Research publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
specifying-time-courses-of-subtypes-of-spatial-neglect-after-stroke-necessary-or-not.pdfEarly view626.05 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.