Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Visual Scanning Training, Limb Activation Treatment, and Prism Adaptation for Rehabilitating Left Neglect: Who is the Winner?
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Visual Scanning Training, Limb Activation Treatment, and Prism Adaptation for Rehabilitating Left Neglect: Who is the Winner?
Do you wish to request the book?
Visual Scanning Training, Limb Activation Treatment, and Prism Adaptation for Rehabilitating Left Neglect: Who is the Winner?
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Visual Scanning Training, Limb Activation Treatment, and Prism Adaptation for Rehabilitating Left Neglect: Who is the Winner?
2013
Overview
WE COMPARED, FOR THE FIRST TIME, THE OVERALL AND DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF THREE OF THE MOST WIDELY USED LEFT NEGLECT (LN) TREATMENTS: visual scanning training (VST), limb activation treatment (LAT), and prism adaptation (PA). Thirty-three LN patients were assigned in quasi-random order to the three groups (VST, LAT, or PA). Each patient received only one type of treatment. LN patients' performance on everyday life tasks was assessed four times (over a period of 6 weeks): A1 and A2 (i.e., the two pre-treatment assessments); A3 and A4 (i.e., the two post-treatment assessments). LN patients in each of the three treatment conditions were treated for the same number of sessions (i.e., 20). The results showed that improvements were present in the majority of the tests assessing the peripersonal space in everyday life activities. Our findings were independent of unspecific factors and lasted for at least 2 weeks following the end of the treatments. There were no interactions, however, between LN treatments and assessments. We suggest that all three treatments can be considered as valid rehabilitation interventions for LN and could be employed for ameliorating LN signs.
Publisher
Frontiers Research Foundation,Frontiers Media S.A
