Search

Abstract Background Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients treated in an intensive care unit (ICU) are at high risk of developing cognitive impairments of a “post-intensive care syndrome” (PICS). We explored whether critically ill COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 survivors differ in their post-ICU recovery course in terms of severity and affected cognitive domains. Methods An observational prospective study was conducted in a German post-acute neurological early rehabilitation clinic. Critically ill patients with or without SARS-CoV-2 infection (at least mechanically ventilated for one week) underwent repeated standardized assessments during their subsequent inpatient rehabilitation stay. Cognitive functions (information processing speed, learning, recognition, short-term and working-memory, word fluency, flexibility) assigned to different domains (attention, memory, executive functions) were assessed as primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included mental (depression, anxiety) and physical (Barthel index, modified ranking scale) state. Results Out of 92 eligible patients (screened between June 2021 and August 2023), 34 were examined, and 30 were available for analysis (15 per group). Both groups were ventilated for a similar period (COVID-19 vs. Non-COVID-19: median: 48 vs. 53 days). Patients of COVID-19 group spend on average 10 days longer at ICU and developed slightly more complications, but subsequent inpatient rehabilitation was of comparable duration (median: 36.5 vs. 37 days). On the group-level both groups showed similar cognitive dysfunctions with striking impairments (normative T-scores

Abstract Objective Neglect after stroke is a disabling disorder and its rehabilitation is a major challenge. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) seems to be a promising adjuvant technique to improve standard care neglect therapy. Since electric fields are influenced by age-related factors, higher current densities are probably needed for effective treatment in aged stroke patients. Validation of treatment efficacy requires sham-controlled experiments, but increased current densities might comprise blinding. Therefore, a pilot study was conducted to test sham adequacy when using current density of 0.8 A/m2. Whether especially neglect patients who mainly suffer from perceptual and attentional deficits are able to differentiate beyond chance active from sham tDCS was investigated in a randomized cross-over design (active/sham stimulation) in 12 early subacute patients with left-sided hemineglect. Stimulation (0.8 A/m2) was performed simultaneous to standard care neglect therapy. Results Odds ratio of correct guessing an atDCS condition compared to wrongly judge an atDCS condition as sham was 10.00 (95%CI 0.65–154.40, p = 0.099). However, given the small sample size and high OR, although likely somewhat overestimated, results require careful interpretation and blinding success in neglect studies with current densities of 0.8 A/m2 should be further confirmed.

Abstract A brief survey among members of the German Neurorehabilitation Society aimed to document the hospital capacities (“beds”) for prolonged weaning from a mechanical ventilator for patients with neuro-disabilities that require simultaneous multi-professional neurorehabilitation treatment. Sixty-eight institutions declared to have capacities with a broad distribution across Germany and its federal states. Overall, 1094 “beds” for prolonged weaning (and neurorehabilitation) were reported, 871 together with further information regarding their identification and hence regional location. These units had on average 16.1 beds for prolonged weaning (95% confidence interval 12.6 to 19.6) with a range from 2 to 68 beds per organization. The data indicate substantial capacities for the combined prolonged weaning and neurorehabilitation treatment in Germany. For most “beds” included in this analysis a basic validation was possible. While a reasonable coverage of these specialized service capacities by the survey is likely, the number reported could still be biased by underreporting by non-response. Both the broad variation of number of “beds” for prolonged weaning per unit and their unequal geographical distribution across federal states (per capita rate) warrant a more refined follow-up survey that will provide insights into reasons for the observed pattern of variation for these specialized hospital capacities.