The Mobility Assessment Course for the Diagnosis of Spatial Neglect: Taking a Step Forward?

Spatial neglect after stroke can be a challenging syndrome to diagnose under standard neuropsychological assessment. There is now sufficient evidence that those affected might demonstrate neglect behavior in everyday settings despite showing no signs of neglect during common neglect tasks. This disc...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Megan Grech, Tracey Stuart, Lindy Williams, Celia Chen, Tobias Loetscher
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-10-01
Series:Frontiers in Neurology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fneur.2017.00563/full
_version_ 1819180241945362432
author Megan Grech
Tracey Stuart
Lindy Williams
Celia Chen
Tobias Loetscher
author_facet Megan Grech
Tracey Stuart
Lindy Williams
Celia Chen
Tobias Loetscher
author_sort Megan Grech
collection DOAJ
description Spatial neglect after stroke can be a challenging syndrome to diagnose under standard neuropsychological assessment. There is now sufficient evidence that those affected might demonstrate neglect behavior in everyday settings despite showing no signs of neglect during common neglect tasks. This discrepancy is attributed to the simplified and unrealistic nature of common pen and paper based tasks that do not match the demanding, novel, and complex environment of everyday life. As such, increasing task demands under more ecologically valid scenarios has become an important method of increasing test sensitivity. The main aim of the current study was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of the Mobility Assessment Course (MAC), an ecological task, for the assessment of neglect. If neglect becomes more apparent under more challenging task demands the MAC could prove to be more diagnostically accurate at detecting neglect than conventional methods, particularly as the time from initial brain damage increases. Data collected by Guide Dogs of SA/NT were retrospectively analyzed. The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, a measure of sensitivity and specificity, was used to investigate the diagnostic utility of the MAC and a series of paper and pencil tests in 67 right hemisphere stroke survivors. While the MAC proved to be a more sensitive neglect test (74.2%) when compared to the Star Cancellation (43.3%) and Line Bisection (35.7%) tests, this was at the expense of relatively low specificity. As a result, the ROC curve analysis showed no statistically discernable differences between tasks (p > 0.12), or between subacute and chronic groups for individual tasks (p > 0.45). It is concluded that, while the MAC is an ecologically valid alternative for assessing neglect, regarding its diagnostic accuracy, there is currently not enough evidence to suggest that it is a big step forward in comparison to the accuracy of conventional tests.
first_indexed 2024-12-22T22:11:13Z
format Article
id doaj.art-e5732fcfb6774d6bb437eac3a45a88da
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1664-2295
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-22T22:11:13Z
publishDate 2017-10-01
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format Article
series Frontiers in Neurology
spelling doaj.art-e5732fcfb6774d6bb437eac3a45a88da2022-12-21T18:10:53ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Neurology1664-22952017-10-01810.3389/fneur.2017.00563301601The Mobility Assessment Course for the Diagnosis of Spatial Neglect: Taking a Step Forward?Megan Grech0Tracey Stuart1Lindy Williams2Celia Chen3Tobias Loetscher4School of Psychology, Social Work, and Social Policy, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, AustraliaGuide Dogs SA/NT, Adelaide, SA, AustraliaSchool of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, AustraliaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, AustraliaSchool of Psychology, Social Work, and Social Policy, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, AustraliaSpatial neglect after stroke can be a challenging syndrome to diagnose under standard neuropsychological assessment. There is now sufficient evidence that those affected might demonstrate neglect behavior in everyday settings despite showing no signs of neglect during common neglect tasks. This discrepancy is attributed to the simplified and unrealistic nature of common pen and paper based tasks that do not match the demanding, novel, and complex environment of everyday life. As such, increasing task demands under more ecologically valid scenarios has become an important method of increasing test sensitivity. The main aim of the current study was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of the Mobility Assessment Course (MAC), an ecological task, for the assessment of neglect. If neglect becomes more apparent under more challenging task demands the MAC could prove to be more diagnostically accurate at detecting neglect than conventional methods, particularly as the time from initial brain damage increases. Data collected by Guide Dogs of SA/NT were retrospectively analyzed. The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, a measure of sensitivity and specificity, was used to investigate the diagnostic utility of the MAC and a series of paper and pencil tests in 67 right hemisphere stroke survivors. While the MAC proved to be a more sensitive neglect test (74.2%) when compared to the Star Cancellation (43.3%) and Line Bisection (35.7%) tests, this was at the expense of relatively low specificity. As a result, the ROC curve analysis showed no statistically discernable differences between tasks (p > 0.12), or between subacute and chronic groups for individual tasks (p > 0.45). It is concluded that, while the MAC is an ecologically valid alternative for assessing neglect, regarding its diagnostic accuracy, there is currently not enough evidence to suggest that it is a big step forward in comparison to the accuracy of conventional tests.http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fneur.2017.00563/fullassessment of neglectmobilityvisionclinical utilityecological validitysensitivity
spellingShingle Megan Grech
Tracey Stuart
Lindy Williams
Celia Chen
Tobias Loetscher
The Mobility Assessment Course for the Diagnosis of Spatial Neglect: Taking a Step Forward?
Frontiers in Neurology
assessment of neglect
mobility
vision
clinical utility
ecological validity
sensitivity
title The Mobility Assessment Course for the Diagnosis of Spatial Neglect: Taking a Step Forward?
title_full The Mobility Assessment Course for the Diagnosis of Spatial Neglect: Taking a Step Forward?
title_fullStr The Mobility Assessment Course for the Diagnosis of Spatial Neglect: Taking a Step Forward?
title_full_unstemmed The Mobility Assessment Course for the Diagnosis of Spatial Neglect: Taking a Step Forward?
title_short The Mobility Assessment Course for the Diagnosis of Spatial Neglect: Taking a Step Forward?
title_sort mobility assessment course for the diagnosis of spatial neglect taking a step forward
topic assessment of neglect
mobility
vision
clinical utility
ecological validity
sensitivity
url http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fneur.2017.00563/full
work_keys_str_mv AT megangrech themobilityassessmentcourseforthediagnosisofspatialneglecttakingastepforward
AT traceystuart themobilityassessmentcourseforthediagnosisofspatialneglecttakingastepforward
AT lindywilliams themobilityassessmentcourseforthediagnosisofspatialneglecttakingastepforward
AT celiachen themobilityassessmentcourseforthediagnosisofspatialneglecttakingastepforward
AT tobiasloetscher themobilityassessmentcourseforthediagnosisofspatialneglecttakingastepforward
AT megangrech mobilityassessmentcourseforthediagnosisofspatialneglecttakingastepforward
AT traceystuart mobilityassessmentcourseforthediagnosisofspatialneglecttakingastepforward
AT lindywilliams mobilityassessmentcourseforthediagnosisofspatialneglecttakingastepforward
AT celiachen mobilityassessmentcourseforthediagnosisofspatialneglecttakingastepforward
AT tobiasloetscher mobilityassessmentcourseforthediagnosisofspatialneglecttakingastepforward