Background Neurology is a field of increasing subspecialization. There is no published data regarding the proportion of neurology subspecialists in the Baltic States. The aim of this cross‐sectional study was to identify factors associated with neurology subspecialty choice, to examine possible differences between neurology residents’ and junior neurologists’ view of subspecialty, and to assess perceived subspecialty acquisition opportunities and subspecialty attractiveness. Methods The research was conducted as an anonymous online survey between December 28, 2020, and January 24, 2021 of neurology residents and neurologists who completed their residency during the last 5 years in the Baltic States. Results In total, 72 residents and 65 neurologists participated. “Cerebrovascular diseases” and “multiple sclerosis and autoimmune diseases of the nervous system” were rated as the two most attractive subspecialties by residents, whereas “headache” and “clinical neurophysiology” were the most attractive among junior neurologists. “Vertigo and dizziness” and “dementia” were ranked the least attractive among both groups. “Cerebrovascular diseases” were perceived as having the most acquisition opportunities. The two most common determinants of subspecialty choice were “medical content of the subspecialty" and "influence of mentor during undergraduate studies or residency”. Conclusions Two‐thirds of junior neurologists subspecialize in at least one subspecialty, and one‐third of residents are already determined to pursue subspecialty training. Junior neurologists rated most outpatient‐related subspecialties as more attractive than neurology residents. Between the Baltic States’ universities, there was a significant difference in the number of residents who were determined to pursue subspecialty training.

No abstract

Background and Objectives: The diagnostic value of thrombophilia remains unknown in young patients with patent foramen ovale (PFO) and stroke. In this study we hypothesized that inherited thrombophilias that lead to venous thrombosis are more prevalent in patients with PFO. Materials and Methods: The study included patients of the tertiary center Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos who had a cryptogenic ischemic stroke between the ages of 18 and 50 between the years 2008 and 2021. Transient ischemic attacks were excluded. Contrast-enhanced transcranial Doppler ultrasound and extensive laboratory testing were performed. Results: The study included 161 cryptogenic stroke patients (mean age 39.2 ± 7.6 years; 54% female), and a right-to-left shunt was found in 112 (69.6%). The mean time between stroke and thrombophilia testing was 210 days (median 98 days). In total, 61 (39.8%) patients were diagnosed with thrombophilia. The most common finding was hyperhomocysteinemia (26.7%), 14.3% of which were genetically confirmed. Two patients (1.2%) were diagnosed with factor V Leiden mutation, three patients (1.9%) with prothrombin G20210A mutation, one patient (0.6%) had a protein C mutation and one patient (0.6%) had a protein S mutation. No antithrombin mutations were diagnosed in our study population. A total of 45.5% of patients with inherited thrombophilia had a right-to-left shunt, while 54.5% did not, p = 0.092. Personal thrombosis anamnesis was positive significantly more often in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome. Conclusions: The hypothesis of the study was rejected since inherited venous thrombophilia was not significantly more common in patients with PFO. Due to the rarity of thrombophilias in general, more research with a larger sample size is required to further verify our findings.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic led to an unprecedented increase in the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) among medical personnel. The goal of this study was to determine the risk factors and frequency of PPE-induced headache during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods From January 25 to March 1, 2021, an anonymous online survey was undertaken in the Baltic states. Results In total, 2132 individuals participated. 52.3% experienced a PPE-induced headache. Usual onset time was between 2–3 h, lasting up to 1 h after PPE removal. The most common localization was in temporal and frontal regions. Headache usually occurred 2 to 3 days per week with an average pain score of 5.04 ± 1.80 points. Higher risk was associated with discomfort/pressure OR = 11.55, heat stress OR = 2.228, skin conditions OR = 1.784, long PPE use (duration 10-12 h) OR = 2,18, headache history prior PPE use OR = 1.207. Out of 52.3% respondents with PPE-induced headache, 45.5% developed de novo headache, whereas 54.5% had headache history. Statistically significant differences of PPE-induced headache between respective groups included severity (4.73 vs 5.29), duration (≥ 6 h 6.7% vs 8.2%), accompanying symptoms (nausea (19.3% vs 25.7%), photophobia (19.1% vs 25.7%), phonophobia (15.8% vs 23.5%), osmophobia (5.3% vs 12.0%)) and painkiller use (43.0% vs 61.7%). Conclusions Over half of the medical personnel reported headache while using PPE. The risk was higher in individuals with headache history, increased duration of PPE use and discomfort while using PPE. Predisposed individuals reported PPE-induced headache which persisted longer, was more intense and debilitating than in the respondents with de novo headache.

The consensus diagnostic criteria for vestibular migraine (VM) are used to specifically describe episodic vestibular symptoms associated with migraine. Because of an incomplete understanding of the etiology, a variety of clinical manifestations, and overlap with other vestibular disorders, the precise prevalence of VM is unknown. Clinical examination during vestibular episodes and vestibular laboratory tests interictally are more commonly abnormal in patients with VM than in controls, but none of the findings are specific for the diagnosis. The majority of information about VM treatment originates from case studies and retrospective reviews. In this chapter, the current epidemiology data, pathophysiology, significance of clinical and laboratory findings, and possible therapeutic approaches with existing and new medications or devices will be discussed.