Citation

Webster JS, Roades LA, Morrill B, Rapport LJ, Abadee PS, Sowa MV, Dutra R, Godlewski MC. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 1995; 76(10): 924-928.

Affiliation

Psychology Service, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Long Beach, CA 90822, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1995, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

7487432

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether rightward orienting bias, without neglect of left hemispace, increased accident risk. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: Inpatient rehabilitation unit of department of government medical center. PATIENTS: Successive right-cerebrovascular accident (CVA) admissions were reviewed over a 2-year period. Only patients with left hemisphere damage, recent abusive drinking, dementia, or inpatient stays of less than 3 weeks were excluded. Fifty-five right-CVA subjects were divided into three groups, based on starting point and omissions in left hemispace on the Rey-Osterreith Complex Figure Drawing and Random Letter Cancellation test. Thirty-two patients were placed in the L-OMIT group (omitted stimuli in left hemispace), 11 patients were placed in the R-BIAS group (began tasks to the right without omissions), and 12 patients were placed in the Non-Neglect Stroke group (no evidence of unilateral neglect). Twenty male inpatients with no history of brain damage served as controls (Normal Control). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency of hospital falls and wheelchair obstacle course contacts. RESULTS: Both the L-OMIT and the R-BIAS groups had more inpatient falls than the other groups F(3,71) = 6.11, p < .001. On the wheelchair obstacle course, the L-OMIT group made more left-sided wheelchair collisions than any other group. However, the R-BIAS group also made more errors than the Non-Neglect Stroke and the Normal Control groups, F(3,55) = 5.72, p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that rightward orienting bias has clinical significance, even without more serious symptoms of unilateral neglect.

Language: en