Advertisement

Neurological Sciences

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 159–163 | Cite as

Reported quality of randomized controlled trials in neglect rehabilitation

  • Matteo Paci
  • Giovanni Matulli
  • Marco Baccini
  • Lucio A. Rinaldi
  • Stefano Baldassi
Original Article

Abstract

The aim of this study is to assess the reported quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of neglect rehabilitation using a standardized scale. A search of seven electronic databases was carried out. Selected articles were scored using the PEDro scale and classified as high or low quality study both with the original cut off of 6 and a modified cut off of 5. A linear regression analysis between year of publication and quality rate was used to test whether the quality of the studies improved with time. A total of 18 RCTs were selected. Six articles (33.3%) and 10 articles (55.56%) were classified as having high quality when the original cut off or the modified cut off of the PEDro scale were used, respectively. Analysis shows no time-related changes in PEDro scores. The results show that reported quality is moderate for RCTs in neglect rehabilitation.

Keywords

Evidence-based medicine Randomized controlled trials Attentional deficits Hemispatial neglect Rehabilitation 

References

  1. 1.
    Swan L (2001) Unilateral spatial neglect. Phys Ther 81:1572–1580PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pierce SR, Buxbaum LJ (2002) Treatments of unilateral neglect: a review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 83:256–268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cherney LR, Halper AS, Kwasnica CM et al (2001) Recovery of functional status after right hemisphere stroke: relationship with unilateral neglect. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 82:322–328CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lincoln NB (1995) The assessment and treatment of disorders of visual perception. Rev Clin Gerontol 5:77–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bowen A, Lincoln NB (2007) Cognitive rehabilitation for spatial neglect following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2):CD003586. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003586.pub2
  6. 6.
    Huwiler-Müntener K, Jüni P et al (2002) Quality of reporting of randomized trials as a measure of methodologic quality. JAMA 287:2801–2804CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moseley AM, Herbert RD, Sherrington C et al (2002) Evidence for physiotherapy practice: a survey of the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Aust J Physiother 48:43–49PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sherrington C, Herbert RD, Maher CG et al (2000) PEDro: a database of randomised trials and systematic reviews in physiotherapy. Man Ther 5:223–226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Armijo Olivo S, Macedo LG, Gadotti EG et al (2008) Scales to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. Phys Ther 88:156–175Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maher G, Sherrington C, Herbert R et al (2003) Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys Ther 83:713–721PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Weinberg J, Diller L, Gordon W et al (1977) Visual scanning training effect on reading-related tasks in acquired right brain damage. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 58:479–486PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weinberg J, Piasetsky E, Diller L et al (1982) Treating perceptual organization deficits in non neglecting RBD stroke patients. J Clin Neuropsychol 4:59–75CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weinberg J, Diller L, Gordon WA et al (1979) Training sensory awareness and spatial organization in people with right brain damage. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 60:491–496PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lincoln NB, Whiting SE, Cockburn J et al (1985) An evaluation of perceptual retraining. Int Rehabil Med 7:99–101PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hommel M, Peres B, Pollak P et al (1990) Effects of passive tactile and auditory stimuli on left visual neglect. Arch Neurol 47:573–576PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rossi PW, Kheyfets S, Reding MJ (1990) Fresnel prisms improve visual perception in stroke patients with homonymous hemianopia or unilateral visual neglect. Neurology 40:1597–1599PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Robertson IH, Gray JM, Pentland B et al (1990) Microcomputer-based rehabilitation for unilateral left visual neglect: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 71:663–668PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cubelli R, Inzaghi G, de Tanti A (1993) La rieducazione della negligenza spaziale unilaterale: verifica sperimentale della sua efficacia [Italian]. Eura Medicophys 29:111–121Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Antonucci G, Guariglia C, Judica A et al (1995) Effectiveness of neglect rehabilitation in a randomized group study. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 17:383–389CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fanthome Y, Lincoln NB, Drummond A et al (1995) The treatment of visual neglect using feedback of eye movements: a pilot study. Disabil Rehabil 17:413–417CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wiart L, Come AB, Debelleix et al (1997) Unilateral neglect syndrome rehabilitation by trunk rotation and scanning training. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 78:424–429CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kalra L, Perez I, Gupta S et al (1997) The influence of visual neglect on stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 28:1386–1391PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Beis JM, Andre JM, Baumgarten A et al (1999) Eye patching in unilateral spatial neglect: efficacy of two methods. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 80:71–76CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Edmans JA, Webster J, Lincoln NB (2000) A comparison of two approaches in the treatment of perceptual problems after stroke. Clin Rehabil 14:230–243CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rusconi ML, Meinecke C, Sbrissa P et al (2002) Different cognitive trainings in the rehabilitation of visuo-spatial neglect. Eura Medicophys 38:159–166Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zeloni G, Farne A, Baccini M (2002) Viewing less to see better. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 73:195–198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cherney LR, Halper AS, Papachronis D (2003) Two approaches to treating unilateral neglect after right hemisphere stroke: a preliminary investigation. Top Stroke Rehabil 9:22–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fong KN, Chan MK et al (2007) The effect of voluntary trunk rotation and half-field eye-patching for patients with unilateral neglect in stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil 21:729–741CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Maher CG (2000) A systematic review of workplace interventions to prevent low back pain. Aust J Physiother 46:259–269PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bhogal SK, Teasell RW, Foley NC et al (2005) The PEDro scale provides a more comprehensive measure of methodological quality than the Jadad scale in stroke rehabilitation literature. J Clin Epidemiol 58:668–673CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matteo Paci
    • 1
    • 2
  • Giovanni Matulli
    • 3
  • Marco Baccini
    • 4
    • 5
  • Lucio A. Rinaldi
    • 6
  • Stefano Baldassi
    • 7
  1. 1.Department of Rehabilitation MedicineCasa di Cura Villa Fiorita, Prato HospitalPratoItaly
  2. 2.FlorenceItaly
  3. 3.Centro di Riabilitazione SesteseSesto Fiorentino (Florence)Italy
  4. 4.Unit of Geriatric Rehabilitation, ASL 10FlorenceItaly
  5. 5.Fondazione “F. Turati”, Rehabilitation CentreGavinana (Pistoia)Italy
  6. 6.Motion Analysis and Neurorehabilitation Laboratory, Department of Critical Care Medicine and Surgery, Unit of Gerontology and Geriatric MedicineUniversity of FlorenceFlorenceItaly
  7. 7.Department of PsychologyUniversity of FlorenceFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations