The PSQI-K is a reliable and valid questionnaire for evaluating sleep quality in patients with sleep disorders.

Background and PurposeThe purposes of this study were to standardize and validate a Korean version of the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI-K), and to evaluate its clinical usefulness.MethodsWe translated the ISI into Korean and then translated it back into English to check its accuracy. The 614 patients with sleep disorders who were enrolled in this study comprised 169 with primary insomnia, 133 with comorbid insomnia, and 312 with obstructive sleep apnea. All subjects underwent one night of polysomnography (PSG) and completed the Korean versions of both the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI-K) and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, as well as the ISI-K. The ISI-K was compared to these sleep scales and various PSG sleep parameters.ResultsThe internal consistency the ISI-K total score was confirmed by a Cronbach's alpha of 0.92, and the item-to-total-score correlations (item-total correlations) ranged from 0.65 to 0.84, suggesting adequate reliability. The correlation between the ISI-K total score and PSQI-K was 0.84, which suggested adequate convergent validity. Low-to-moderate correlations were obtained between the ISI-K total score and PSG-defined sleep parameters: 0.22 for sleep onset latency, 0.38 for wake after sleep onset, and 0.46 for sleep efficiency. A cutoff score of 15.5 on the ISI-K was optimal for discriminating patients with insomnia. The test-retest scores over a 4-week interval with 34 subjects yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.86, suggesting excellent temporal stability.ConclusionsThe findings of this study show that the ISI-K is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the severity of insomnia in a Korean population.

Background and Purpose-Acute ischemic stroke in the distribution of the anterior inferior cerebellar artery (AICA) is known to be associated with vertigo, nystagmus, facial weakness, and gait ataxia. Few reports have carefully examined the deafness associated with the AICA infarction. Furthermore, previous neurological reports have not emphasized the inner ear as a localization of sudden deafness. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of deafness associated with the AICA infarction and the sites predominantly involved in deafness. Methods-Over 2 years, we prospectively identified 12 consecutive patients with unilateral AICA infarction diagnosed by brain MRI. Pure-tone audiogram, speech discrimination testing, stapedial reflex testing, and auditory brainstem response were performed to localize the site of lesion in the auditory pathways. Electronystagmography was also performed to evaluate the function of the vestibular system. Results-The most common affected site on brain MRI was the middle cerebellar peduncle (nϭ11). Four patients had vertigo and/or acute auditory symptoms such as hearing loss or tinnitus as an isolated manifestation from 1 day to 2 months before infarction. Audiological testings confirmed sensorineural hearing loss in 11 patients (92%), predominantly cochlear in 6 patients, retrocochlear in 1 patient, and combined on the affected side cochlear and retrocochlear in 4 patients. Electronystagmography demonstrated no response to caloric stimulation in 10 patients (83%). Conclusions-In our series, sudden deafness was an important sign for the diagnosis of AICA infarction. Audiological examinations suggest that sudden deafness in AICA infarction is usually due to dysfunction of the cochlea resulting from ischemia to the inner ear.

Consensus recommendations based on clinical practice are presented, including when to use oral iron or IV iron, and recommendations on repeated iron treatments. New iron treatment algorithms, based on evidence and consensus opinion have been developed.

We read with great interest the study by Lim et al, 1 which aimed to develop an easily applicable scale to grade the severity of autoimmune encephalitis (AE). Nine key clinical features were identified and included in the Clinical Assessment Scale in Autoimmune Encephalitis (CASE). CASE showed good interobserver and intraobserver reliability, and internal consistency, as well as a high correlation with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS).We applied CASE retrospectively to a cohort of 60 patients with AE, admitted to our institution between 2012 and 2018, and prospectively in 3 additional patients. Median age at onset was 55 years (range = 3 months-88 years), in 13 of 63 (21%) onset was before 18 years of age, and 34 of 63 (54%) were female. All patients fulfilled the clinical diagnostic criteria for AE 2 : definite AE was diagnosed in 16 of 63 patients (25%), definite anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis in 11 of 63 (17%), definite autoimmune limbic encephalitis in 6 of 63 (10%), antibody-negative probable AE in 4 of 63 (6 %), possible AE in 25 of 63 (40%), and Hashimoto encephalopathy in 1 of 63 (2%). At the disease nadir, median mRS score was 4 (range = 3-5). We applied CASE at maximum clinical severity (median CASE score = 9, range = 3-24). In our cohort, CASE significantly correlated with mRS (p < 0.0001, r 2 = 0.5025; Fig), although the correlation strength was weaker than that reported by Lim et al. However, we encountered several issues when CASE was applied to our patients that need to be clarified. Severe clinical conditions, such as coma and status epilepticus, make other items hardly assessable (eg, gait instability, language). In such cases, it is not specified what score should be given to items that are not directly assessable (we gave the maximum score). Postictal state after seizures also interferes with the evaluation of most items. The authors should clarify how to apply the scale in these situations and whether this score is meant to be used only in clinically stable patients. Furthermore, when applying CASE to a pediatric population, some items, such as memory and language, were not easily assessable. We think that the scale is more suitable for adult patients. Moreover, it would be appropriate to develop a different scale for patients with altered consciousness.CASE is potentially a useful tool and addresses the unmet need of clinical scales to grade AE severity, as mRS is quite coarse in evaluating this condition. However, CASE needs further improvement and validation to be employed in clinical trials.