Neuropsychological functioning in right hemisphere infarct patients—Does thrombolytic treatment matter?

the Screening Tests. (MMSE 291, ACE 926). Significant differences were found betweenpatients andnormal controls in the following tests: a) FrontalAssessment Battery (p=0.19); b) Conceptualization Subscale (p=0.006); c) Differ Memory Reys List (p=0.03), Boston Naming Test (p=0.019), Semantic Verbal Fluency (p=0.021); d) Letters and Numbers (p=0.033); e) Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (p=0.032); f) Hotel task deviation of time (p=0.018); g) Met-hv total failures (p=0.001), Aim Interpretation Subscale (p=0.003), Fulfillment of tasks Subscale (p=0.001), Inefficiencies Subscale (p=0.000) and h) Test of Attentional Performance, Flexibility Subscale (p=0.045). Conclusions: This study supports previous reports showing that there is a pattern of cognitive abnormalities after focal cerebellar damage that especially includes impairments of executive functions (planning, setshifting, abstract reasoning, verbal fluency, working memory). Moreover, it suggests that the ecological executive battery used in this investigation might be much more sensitive for the detection of deficits in real life executive functions in these patients.