We examined whether number of prism adaptation treatment (PAT) sessions in regular clinical practice would predict spatial neglect (SN) improvement and rehabilitation outcomes. We reviewed clinical records from 16 U.S. rehabilitation hospitals where neurological patients were assessed for SN using the Catherine Bergego Scale (CBS) and if SN was detected, and may have received PAT. Multiple linear regression was used to predict CBS Change (indicating SN improvement) in 520 patients who received PAT while considering age, sex, diagnosis, time post diagnosis, CBS at baseline, neglected side of space, and length of stay. Another set of regression models including the same variables and adding Function Independent Measure (FIM®) at admission was used to predict FIM Gains (indicating rehabilitation outcomes) in 1720 patients receiving PAT or not. We found that greater number of PAT sessions predicted greater CBS Change, especially in patients with moderate-to-severe neglect. Number of PAT sessions also positively correlated with Total FIM, Motor FIM, and Cognitive FIM Gains regardless of SN severity classification at baseline. Furthermore, number of PAT sessions predicted CBS Change and FIM Gains among patients completing ≤8 PAT sessions but not among patients with ≥8 sessions, who however, showed greater CBS Change with increased PAT frequency (i.e., fewer days between two consecutive sessions). Receiving more once-daily PAT sessions predicted greater improvement in SN and rehabilitation outcomes. Receiving PAT at a higher frequency for 8 or more sessions predicted better SN improvement. Thus, dosage matters. The study provides practice-based evidence that PAT is appropriate for inpatient rehabilitation.

IntroductionSpatial neglect, a neurocognitive disorder of lateralized spatial attention, is prevalent among stroke survivors especially in inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs). The ultimate goal of the project was to improve spatial neglect care in inpatient rehabilitation and trained as many OTs as possible using both tools in their regular practices as the means to achieve our overall objective. Therefore, we conducted a project aimed at implementing two evidence-based protocols, one for assessment (KF-NAP®) and the other for treatment (KF-PAT®), and share the implementation process, which included barriers and facilitators identified during and after the process, and implementation outcomes.MethodsSixteen IRFs were involved. The Knowledge-To-Action Cycle was used to describe the process of knowledge inquiry (training), translating knowledge (implementation) and evaluating the use of knowledge in clinical practice (outcomes). Barriers and strategies were reported using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and identified through a survey, after the study concluded.ResultsThirty-two therapists at the participating sites were trained to some level of the KF-NAP and KF-PAT. Throughout the project and also once after it finished, different barriers were identified by researchers and clinicians, who then determined together actions to eliminate or minimize the barriers. For example, multiple sites reported: “not having time to train other staff at their hospital due to high patient volume and other responsibilities.”DiscussionThe project shared our implementation process which demonstrated the importance of using implementation methods and incorporating a researcher-clinician partnership, not only for knowledge generation but also knowledge translation. Frequent communications and exchanging information with stakeholders at different levels, may be determinant to the success of each implementation phase. Further research is needed.

No abstract

No abstract