A Systematic Review of Cognition in Cervical Dystonia.

IF 5.4 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES
Neuropsychology Review Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-01-25 DOI:10.1007/s11065-022-09558-z
Sarah O'Connor, David Hevey, Tom Burke, Shameer Rafee, Niall Pender, Fiadhnait O'Keeffe
{"title":"A Systematic Review of Cognition in Cervical Dystonia.","authors":"Sarah O'Connor, David Hevey, Tom Burke, Shameer Rafee, Niall Pender, Fiadhnait O'Keeffe","doi":"10.1007/s11065-022-09558-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Growing evidence points to a spectrum of non-motor symptoms, including cognitive difficulties that have a greater impact on functional outcomes and quality of life than motor symptoms in cervical dystonia (CD). Some cognitive impairments have been reported; however, findings are inconsistent, and described across mixed groups of dystonia. The current review aimed to examine the evidence for cognitive impairments in CD. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO and Web of Science databases were searched. Studies were included if they met the following criteria (i) cross-sectional or longitudinal studies of adults with CD, (ii) where the results of standardised measures of cognitive or neuropsychological function in any form were assessed and reported, (iii) results compared to a control group or normative data, and (iv) were published in English. Results are presented in a narrative synthesis. Twenty studies were included. Subtle difficulties with general intellectual functioning, processing speed, verbal memory, visual memory, visuospatial function, executive function, and social cognition were identified while language, and attention and working memory appear to be relatively spared. Several methodological limitations were identified that should be considered when interpreting the evidence to describe a specific profile of cognitive impairment in CD. Clinical and research implications are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10920436/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-022-09558-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Growing evidence points to a spectrum of non-motor symptoms, including cognitive difficulties that have a greater impact on functional outcomes and quality of life than motor symptoms in cervical dystonia (CD). Some cognitive impairments have been reported; however, findings are inconsistent, and described across mixed groups of dystonia. The current review aimed to examine the evidence for cognitive impairments in CD. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO and Web of Science databases were searched. Studies were included if they met the following criteria (i) cross-sectional or longitudinal studies of adults with CD, (ii) where the results of standardised measures of cognitive or neuropsychological function in any form were assessed and reported, (iii) results compared to a control group or normative data, and (iv) were published in English. Results are presented in a narrative synthesis. Twenty studies were included. Subtle difficulties with general intellectual functioning, processing speed, verbal memory, visual memory, visuospatial function, executive function, and social cognition were identified while language, and attention and working memory appear to be relatively spared. Several methodological limitations were identified that should be considered when interpreting the evidence to describe a specific profile of cognitive impairment in CD. Clinical and research implications are discussed.

Abstract Image

颈性肌张力障碍认知的系统性回顾。
越来越多的证据表明,与颈性肌张力障碍(CD)的运动症状相比,包括认知障碍在内的一系列非运动症状对患者功能结果和生活质量的影响更大。已有一些认知障碍的报道,但研究结果并不一致,而且描述的肌张力障碍类型也不尽相同。本综述旨在研究 CD 患者认知障碍的证据。研究人员检索了 MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsychINFO 和 Web of Science 数据库。符合以下标准的研究均被纳入其中:(i) 对成人 CD 患者进行的横断面或纵向研究;(ii) 以任何形式对认知或神经心理功能的标准化测量结果进行评估和报告;(iii) 将结果与对照组或常模数据进行比较;(iv) 以英语发表。研究结果以叙述性综述的形式呈现。共纳入 20 项研究。研究发现,在一般智力功能、处理速度、言语记忆、视觉记忆、视觉空间功能、执行功能和社会认知方面存在微妙的困难,而语言、注意力和工作记忆似乎相对较好。研究发现了一些方法上的局限性,在解释这些证据以描述 CD 患者认知障碍的具体特征时应考虑到这些局限性。本文对临床和研究意义进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neuropsychology Review
Neuropsychology Review 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
1.70%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信