Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsinchu, Taiwan.
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Jul 4;26:e49530. doi: 10.2196/49530.
Circadian rhythm disruptions are a common concern for poststroke patients undergoing rehabilitation and might negatively impact their functional outcomes.
Our research aimed to uncover unique patterns and disruptions specific to poststroke rehabilitation patients and identify potential differences in specific rest-activity rhythm indicators when compared to inpatient controls with non-brain-related lesions, such as patients with spinal cord injuries.
We obtained a 7-day recording with a wearable actigraphy device from 25 poststroke patients (n=9, 36% women; median age 56, IQR 46-71) and 25 age- and gender-matched inpatient control participants (n=15, 60% women; median age 57, IQR 46.5-68.5). To assess circadian rhythm, we used a nonparametric method to calculate key rest-activity rhythm indicators-relative amplitude, interdaily stability, and intradaily variability. Relative amplitude, quantifying rest-activity rhythm amplitude while considering daily variations and unbalanced amplitudes, was calculated as the ratio of the difference between the most active 10 continuous hours and the least active 5 continuous hours to the sum of these 10 and 5 continuous hours. We also examined the clinical correlations between rest-activity rhythm indicators and delirium screening tools, such as the 4 A's Test and the Barthel Index, which assess delirium and activities of daily living.
Patients who had a stroke had higher least active 5-hour values compared to the control group (median 4.29, IQR 2.88-6.49 vs median 1.84, IQR 0.67-4.34; P=.008). The most active 10-hour values showed no significant differences between the groups (stroke group: median 38.92, IQR 14.60-40.87; control group: median 31.18, IQR 18.02-46.84; P=.93). The stroke group presented a lower relative amplitude compared to the control group (median 0.74, IQR 0.57-0.85 vs median 0.88, IQR 0.71-0.96; P=.009). Further analysis revealed no significant differences in other rest-activity rhythm metrics between the two groups. Among the patients who had a stroke, a negative correlation was observed between the 4 A's Test scores and relative amplitude (ρ=-0.41; P=.045). Across all participants, positive correlations emerged between the Barthel Index scores and both interdaily stability (ρ=0.34; P=.02) and the most active 10-hour value (ρ=0.42; P=.002).
This study highlights the relevance of circadian rhythm disruptions in poststroke rehabilitation and provides insights into potential diagnostic and prognostic implications for rest-activity rhythm indicators as digital biomarkers.
节律紊乱是接受康复治疗的脑卒中患者常见的问题,可能会对其功能结果产生负面影响。
我们的研究旨在揭示脑卒中康复患者特有的节律紊乱模式和特征,并确定与非脑部病变(如脊髓损伤)的住院患者相比,特定的静息-活动节律指标的潜在差异。
我们使用可穿戴活动记录仪从 25 名脑卒中患者(n=9,36%为女性;中位年龄 56 岁,IQR 46-71)和 25 名年龄和性别匹配的住院患者(n=15,60%为女性;中位年龄 57 岁,IQR 46.5-68.5)中获得了 7 天的记录。为了评估昼夜节律,我们使用非参数方法计算了关键的静息-活动节律指标——相对幅度、日间稳定性和日内变异性。相对幅度,在考虑日常变化和不平衡幅度的情况下量化静息-活动节律幅度,是最活跃的 10 个连续小时与最不活跃的 5 个连续小时之间的差值与这 10 个和 5 个连续小时的总和之比。我们还检查了静息-活动节律指标与谵妄筛查工具(如 4A 测试和巴氏量表)之间的临床相关性,这些工具评估谵妄和日常生活活动能力。
与对照组相比,脑卒中患者的最不活跃的 5 小时值更高(中位数 4.29,IQR 2.88-6.49 与中位数 1.84,IQR 0.67-4.34;P=.008)。两组之间最活跃的 10 小时值没有显著差异(脑卒中组:中位数 38.92,IQR 14.60-40.87;对照组:中位数 31.18,IQR 18.02-46.84;P=.93)。与对照组相比,脑卒中组的相对幅度较低(中位数 0.74,IQR 0.57-0.85 与中位数 0.88,IQR 0.71-0.96;P=.009)。进一步分析显示,两组之间其他静息-活动节律指标无显著差异。在脑卒中患者中,4A 测试评分与相对幅度呈负相关(ρ=-0.41;P=.045)。在所有参与者中,巴氏量表评分与日间稳定性(ρ=0.34;P=.02)和最活跃的 10 小时值(ρ=0.42;P=.002)呈正相关。
本研究强调了节律紊乱在脑卒中康复中的重要性,并为静息-活动节律指标作为数字生物标志物的潜在诊断和预后意义提供了新的见解。