Impact of unilateral neglect on assistive device use¹

Article type: Research Article

Authors: Prangrat, Tipa | Mann, William C.^{; *} | Tomita, Machiko

Affiliations: Department of Occupational Therapy, State University of New York at Buffalo, 515 Kimball Tower, 3435 Main Street, Buffalo, NY 14214, USA

Correspondence: [*] Tel. + 1 716 829 3141; Fax: + 1 716 829 3217; E-mail: wmann@acsu.buffalo.edu.

Note: [1] A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of State University of New York at Buffalo in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Department of Occupational Therapy.

Abstract: The number of people in the United States who suffer from stroke has been increasing; in 1994 more than 500,000 people suffered a stroke. Stroke can result in many impairments and have a significant impact on a person's functional performance. Perceptual dysfunction is one potential complication of stroke, and unilateral neglect is one aspect of perceptual dysfunction. More than 30 percent of people who have had a stroke experience unilateral neglect. Unilateral neglect can impact on performance in daily tasks, tasks for which many persons who have had a stroke use assistive devices to offset the impact of motor impairment. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship of unilateral neglect to problems with assistive device use by persons with stroke and to investigate how persons with unilateral neglect use assistive devices. Subjects were selected from the sample pool of the Consumer Assessment Study (CAS) of the University at Buffalo Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Aging. CAS participants who had a stroke and whose Mini Mental Status Exam (MMSE) score was above 23 were included in the study. Sixteen study participants were assessed for unilateral neglect with the Behavioral Inattention Test (BIT). Participants whose scores on the BIT were less than 129 out of 146 were categorized as having unilateral neglect. Of 12 participants, 3 were identified as having unilateral neglect, 9 were identified as not having unilateral neglect. Numbers of assistive devices owned and used and the rate of device use to device ownership were compared between study participants with and without unilateral neglect. The study also examined how participants with and without unilateral neglect use mobility devices. Problems with a mobility device potentially related to unilateral neglect were identified through observation. Use of other assistive devices by the 3 participants with unilateral neglect was more extensively explored. No significant differences between the two groups were found in the number of devices owned and used. The rate of device use to device ownership in the non unilateral neglect group was higher than in the unilateral neglect group. We report how participants with and without unilateral neglect used their assistive devices.

DOI: 10.3233/TAD-2000-12107

Journal: Technology and Disability, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 53-69, 2000