[Purpose] This study examined the effects of various dual task gait training methods (motor dual task gait training, cognitive dual task gait training, and motor and cognitive dual task gait training) on the balance and gait abilities of chronic stroke patients. [Subjects and Methods] Thirty-three outpatients performed dual task gait training for 30 minutes per day, three times a week, for eight weeks from June to August, 2012. Balance ability was measured pre-and posttest using the stability test index, the weight distribution index, the functional reach test, the timed up and go test, and the four square step test. Gait ability was measured by the 10 m walk test and a 6 min walk test before and after the training. The paired t-test was used to compare measurements before and after training within each group, and ANOVA was used to compare measurements before and after training among the groups. [Results] Comparisons within each group indicated significant differences in all variables between before and after the training in all three groups. Comparison between the groups showed that the greatest improvements were seen in all tests, except for the timed up and go test, following motor and cognitive dual task gait training. [Conclusion] In a real walking environment, the motor and cognitive dual task gait training was more effective at improving the balance and gait abilities of chronic stroke patients than either the motor dual task gait training or the cognitive dual task gait training alone.

Red blood cell (RBC) alloimmunization results from genetic disparity of RBC antigens between donor and recipients. The discrepancy of RBC antibody screening test occurs when the results of red cell tests do not agree with those of the serum test. In order to select the proper blood units for transfusion, clarification of the cause of discrepancies is essential. The RBC antibody screening test is an easy, quick, and reliable method for detection of clinically significant antibodies. Antibody screening and identification is recommended prior to transfusion to determine whether there is blood group incompatibility. We reported that phenotyping for E, D, M, E+c, and C+e antibody screening test should be extended. Therefore, these results indicate that anti-D and anti-E alloantibodies were major risk factors for haemolytic disease of the newborn or delayed haemolytic transfusion reactions in this study population. We suggested that its antibody screening be adapted to blood safety interventions. Targeted screening of selected recipients at risk offers less value than universal antibody screening, and more research is needed to determine the real incidence of this national condition.