TY - JOUR
T1 - Recovery after stroke
T2 - the severely impaired are a distinct group
AU - Bonkhoff, Anna K.
AU - Hope, Tom
AU - Bzdok, Danilo
AU - Guggisberg, Adrian G.
AU - Hawe, Rachel L.
AU - Dukelow, Sean P.
AU - Chollet, François
AU - Lin, David J.
AU - Grefkes, Christian
AU - Bowman, Howard
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 BMJ Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/4
Y1 - 2022/4
N2 - Introduction Stroke causes different levels of impairment and the degree of recovery varies greatly between patients. The majority of recovery studies are biased towards patients with mild-to-moderate impairments, challenging a unified recovery process framework. Our aim was to develop a statistical framework to analyse recovery patterns in patients with severe and non-severe initial impairment and concurrently investigate whether they recovered differently. Methods We designed a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate 3–6 months upper limb Fugl-Meyer (FM) scores after stroke. When focusing on the explanation of recovery patterns, we addressed confounds affecting previous recovery studies and considered patients with FM-initial scores <45 only. We systematically explored different FM-breakpoints between severe/non-severe patients (FM-initial=5–30). In model comparisons, we evaluated whether impairment-level-specific recovery patterns indeed existed. Finally, we estimated the out-of-sample prediction performance for patients across the entire initial impairment range. Results Recovery data was assembled from eight patient cohorts (n=489). Data were best modelled by incorporating two subgroups (breakpoint: FM-initial=10). Both subgroups recovered a comparable constant amount, but with different proportional components: severely affected patients recovered more the smaller their impairment, while non-severely affected patients recovered more the larger their initial impairment. Prediction of 3–6 months outcomes could be done with an R2=63.5% (95% CI=51.4% to 75.5%). Conclusions Our work highlights the benefit of simultaneously modelling recovery of severely-to-non-severely impaired patients and demonstrates both shared and distinct recovery patterns. Our findings provide evidence that the severe/non-severe subdivision in recovery modelling is not an artefact of previous confounds. The presented out-of-sample prediction performance may serve as benchmark to evaluate promising biomarkers of stroke recovery.
AB - Introduction Stroke causes different levels of impairment and the degree of recovery varies greatly between patients. The majority of recovery studies are biased towards patients with mild-to-moderate impairments, challenging a unified recovery process framework. Our aim was to develop a statistical framework to analyse recovery patterns in patients with severe and non-severe initial impairment and concurrently investigate whether they recovered differently. Methods We designed a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate 3–6 months upper limb Fugl-Meyer (FM) scores after stroke. When focusing on the explanation of recovery patterns, we addressed confounds affecting previous recovery studies and considered patients with FM-initial scores <45 only. We systematically explored different FM-breakpoints between severe/non-severe patients (FM-initial=5–30). In model comparisons, we evaluated whether impairment-level-specific recovery patterns indeed existed. Finally, we estimated the out-of-sample prediction performance for patients across the entire initial impairment range. Results Recovery data was assembled from eight patient cohorts (n=489). Data were best modelled by incorporating two subgroups (breakpoint: FM-initial=10). Both subgroups recovered a comparable constant amount, but with different proportional components: severely affected patients recovered more the smaller their impairment, while non-severely affected patients recovered more the larger their initial impairment. Prediction of 3–6 months outcomes could be done with an R2=63.5% (95% CI=51.4% to 75.5%). Conclusions Our work highlights the benefit of simultaneously modelling recovery of severely-to-non-severely impaired patients and demonstrates both shared and distinct recovery patterns. Our findings provide evidence that the severe/non-severe subdivision in recovery modelling is not an artefact of previous confounds. The presented out-of-sample prediction performance may serve as benchmark to evaluate promising biomarkers of stroke recovery.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85126490273&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85126490273&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/jnnp-2021-327211
DO - 10.1136/jnnp-2021-327211
M3 - Article
C2 - 34937750
AN - SCOPUS:85126490273
SN - 0022-3050
VL - 93
SP - 369
EP - 378
JO - Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry
JF - Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry
IS - 4
ER -