Objectives: Comparatively little research has been conducted on right neglect after left brain damage. The authors sought to assess contralateral neglect in subacute left hemisphere stroke patients using a comprehensive test battery validated in a large control group after right hemisphere stroke. Methods: Seventy-eight left hemisphere stroke patients were assessed. The test battery included a preliminary assessment of anosognosia and visual extinction, a clinical assessment of gaze orientation and personal neglect, and paper-and-pencil tests of spatial neglect in the peripersonal space. Only nonverbal tests were used. Results: Drawing and cancellation tasks revealed neglect in 10 to 13% of patients. The combined battery was more sensitive than any single test alone. A total of 43.5% of patients showed some degree of neglect on at least one measure. Anatomic analyses showed that neglect was more common and severe when the posterior association cortex was damaged. Conclusions: The frequency of occurrence of right neglect was, as expected, much lower than that reported in a study using the same assessment battery in right brain damage stroke patients. Nevertheless, neglect was found in a substantial proportion of patients at a subacute stage, suggesting that it should be considered in the rehabilitation planning of left brain damage stroke patients.

Purpose: The lack of agreement regarding assessment methods is responsible for the variability in the reported rate of occurrence of unilateral neglect (UN) after stroke. In addition, dissociations have been reported between performance on traditional paper-and-pencil tests and UN in everyday life situations. Methods: In this paper, we present the validation studies of a quantitative test battery for UN, including paper-and-pencil tests, an assessment of personal neglect, extinction, and anosognosia, and a behavioural assessment, the Catherine Bergego Scale (CBS). The battery was given to healthy subjects (n=456–476) and to patients with subacute stroke, either of the right or the left hemisphere. Results: In healthy subjects, a significant effect of age, education duration and acting hand was found in several tasks. In patients with right hemisphere stroke, the most sensitive paper and pencil measure was the starting point in the cancellation task. The whole battery was more sensitive than any single test alone. An important finding was that behavioural assessment was more sensitive than any other single test. Neglect was two to four times less frequent, but also less severe and less consistent after left hemisphere stroke. Conclusion: Assessment of UN should rely on a battery of quantitative and standardised tests. Some patients may show clinically significant UN in everyday life while obtaining a normal performance on paper-and-pencil measures. This underlines the necessity to use a behavioural assessment of UN.

Numerous studies have recently been published on improving upper-limb motor function after stroke. There has been a particular interest in brain stimulation techniques, which could promote brain plasticity. In this review, transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) and repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) are presented as techniques that could be relevant in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R) centers in the future. We are presenting a comprehensive literature review on the studies using tDCS or rTMS for upper-limb rehabilitation after a stroke. Both techniques have shown their ability to modify cortical excitability and to transitorily improve upper-limb function after one single stimulation session. The first placebo-controlled, blinded therapeutic trials, which included repeated daily sessions, seem quite promising, and deserve to be validated by further trials.

Study design: Prospective study. Objectives: To determine the mechanisms of body illusions in paraplegia patients as compared with the amputee phantom phenomena. Methods: A vestibular caloric stimulation was performed in 10 consecutive patients with complete section of the spinal cord. Perception of body, before and after stimulation, was classed as illusion of a normal body (lower limbs with normal morphological, postural and kinetic characteristics perceived as before spinal injury), normal phantom (overly vivid perception of all or part of the lower limbs), deformed phantom (perception of all or part of the limbs below the injury level as abnormal in shape, posture, movement or even number), or painful phantom. Results: After vestibular caloric stimulation, nine out of 10 patients stated their perception of body segments below the injury level had changed to normal phantoms or to deformed phantoms (morphological, postural or kinetic changes). Among the four patients who initially had painful limbs, two stated the stimulation greatly relieved their pain. Conclusion: The normal or deformed phantom evoked by vestibular stimulation would result from use of identity data or instantaneous data as is observed in amputees. Cerebral remapping following deafferentation could be the origin of the deformed phantoms. Illusions corresponding to phenomena perceived at the time of the accident corresponding to autobiographical engrammes do not appear to be evoked by vestibular stimulation, as is also the case in amputees. Spinal Cord (2001) 39, 85–87.