Evaluation of ataxia in mild ischemic stroke patients using the scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia (SARA)

14Citations
Citations of this article
62Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective To demonstrate the utility of Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) for evaluation of posterior circulation-related features in patients with mild stroke. Methods Forty-five subjects, diagnosed with acute infarction in the cerebellum, basis pontis, thalamus, corona radiata, posterior limb of internal capsule, and their National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores =5 were enrolled. SARA scores were graded by the cut-off value of severity in dependency of activities of daily living (ADL). SARA, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Timed Up-and-Go (TUG), and Trunk Control Test (TCT) were correlated in regression analysis with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at discharge. Correlation between SARA and other tools was analyzed. Patients were divided based on mRS at admission (group A, mRS 0-2; group B, mRS 3-5). Scores between the two groups were compared. Results Among the subjects, 48.9% (22/45) scored above 5.5 on SARA, and even 11.1% (5/45) scored higher than 14.25, which is the cut-off value of 'severe dependency' in ADL. SARA showed significant value for prediction of mRS at discharge. SARA was correlated with BBS (r=-0.946, p<0.001), TUG (r=-0.584, p<0.001), and TCT (r=-0.799, p<0.001). The SARA, BBS, TUG, and TCT scores between were lower in group B than in group A patients. SARA as well as BBS, TUG, and TCT reflect the functional severity of all patients. Conclusion SARA is a complementary tool for evaluation of the severity of ataxia in mild stroke patients with features of posterior circulation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Choi, S. W., Han, N., Jung, S. H., Kim, H. D., Eom, M. J., & Bae, H. W. (2018). Evaluation of ataxia in mild ischemic stroke patients using the scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia (SARA). Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine, 42(3), 375–383. https://doi.org/10.5535/arm.2018.42.3.375

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free