Dueffert, Lucas G.

Abstract Study Objectives To analyze cognitive deficits leading to unsafe driving in patients with REM Sleep Behavior Disorder (RBD), strongly associated with cognitive impairment and synucleinopathy-related neurodegeneration. Methods Twenty isolated RBD (iRBD), 10 symptomatic RBD (sRBD), and 20 age- and education-matched controls participated in a prospective case-control driving simulation study. Group mean differences were compared with correlations between cognitive and driving safety measures. Results iRBD and sRBD patients were more cognitively impaired than controls in global neurocognitive functioning, processing speeds, visuospatial attention, and distractibility (p < .05). sRBD patients drove slower with more collisions than iRBD patients and controls (p < .05), required more warnings, and had greater difficulty following and matching speed of a lead car during simulated car-following tasks (p < .05). Driving safety measures were similar between iRBD patients and controls. Slower psychomotor speed correlated with more off-road accidents (r = 0.65) while processing speed (−0.88), executive function (−0.90), and visuospatial impairment (0.74) correlated with safety warnings in sRBD patients. Slower stimulus recognition was associated with more signal-light (0.64) and stop-sign (0.56) infractions in iRBD patients. Conclusions iRBD and sRBD patients have greater selective cognitive impairments than controls, particularly visuospatial abilities and processing speed. sRBD patients exhibited unsafe driving behaviors, associated with processing speed, visuospatial awareness, and attentional impairments. Our results suggest that iRBD patients have similar driving-simulator performance as healthy controls but that driving capabilities regress as RBD progresses to symptomatic RBD with overt signs of cognitive, autonomic, and motor impairment. Longitudinal studies with serial driving simulator evaluations and objective on-road driving performance are needed.

SummaryObjectiveWe aimed to determine the frequency of probable obstructive sleep apnea (pOSA) in refractory epilepsy monitoring unit inpatients and clinical features associated with pOSA, including risk for sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP).MethodsWe prospectively recruited 49 consecutive adult patients admitted to the Mayo Clinic Epilepsy Monitoring Unit with focal, generalized, or unclassified epilepsy syndromes. pOSA was identified using oximetric oxyhemoglobin desaturation index (ODI) and the Sleep Apnea–Sleep Disorders Questionnaire (SA‐SDQ) and STOP‐BAG screening tools. Revised SUDEP Risk Inventory (rSUDEP‐7) scores were calculated, and epilepsy patients with and without pOSA were compared with Wilcoxon signed‐rank tests. Correlation and regression analyses were utilized to determine relationships between pOSA and rSUDEP‐7 scores.ResultsThirty‐five percent of patients had pOSA, with a mean ODI of 11.3 ± 5.1/h (range = 5.1‐22.8). Patients with pOSA were older and heavier, and more frequently had a focal epilepsy syndrome and longer epilepsy duration, with higher SA‐SDQ and STOP‐BAG scores (all P < 0.05). Median rSUDEP‐7 score was 3 ± 1.4 (range = 0‐6). Higher rSUDEP‐7 scores were positively correlated with higher ODI (P = 0.036). rSUDEP‐7 score ≥ 5 was associated with pOSA by ODI, SA‐SDQ, and STOP‐BAG questionnaire criteria (P < 0.05).SignificanceOur pilot study identified a high frequency of pOSA in refractory epilepsy monitoring patients, finding that pOSA patients were older and heavier, with higher screening symptoms for sleep apnea and more frequent focal seizures with a longer epilepsy duration. We also found a possible association between OSA and SUDEP risk. Identification and treatment of OSA in patients with epilepsy could conceivably provide a novel approach toward preventing the risk of SUDEP. Future studies with polysomnography are needed to confirm predictive features for OSA in epilepsy populations, and to determine whether OSA is associated with SUDEP risk.

Background: External rotation (ER) strengthening of the shoulder is an integral component of rehabilitative and preventative programs for overhead athletes. A variety of shoulder ER strengthening exercises are reported, including those intended to integrate the core musculature. The purpose of this study was to examine ER torque and electromyographic (EMG) activation of shoulder and trunk muscles while performing resisted isometric shoulder ER in 3 positions (standing, side lying, and side plank). Hypothesis: Significantly greater force and shoulder muscle activation would be generated while side lying given the inherent stability of the position, and greater trunk muscle activation would be generated in the less stable plank position. Study Design: Quasi-experimental repeated-measures study. Level of Evidence: Level 5. Methods: A convenience sample of 25 healthy overhead recreational athletes (9 men, 16 women) participated in this study. EMG electrodes were placed on the infraspinatus, posterior deltoid, middle trapezius, multifidi, internal obliques, and external obliques. EMG signals were normalized to a maximal isometric contraction. Participants performed resisted isometric ER in standing, side-lying, and side plank positions. Results were analyzed using a repeated-measures analysis of variance with post hoc Bonferroni corrections (α = 0.05). Results: There was no significant difference in ER torque between positions (α = 0.05). A significant difference in EMG activity of shoulder and trunk musculature between positions was found in 7 of the 8 muscles monitored. Significantly greater EMG activity in the infraspinatus, middle trapezius, and the nondominant external and internal obliques was found in the side plank position as compared with standing and side lying. Conclusion: While there was no difference in ER torque between the 3 exercise positions, EMG activity of the shoulder and trunk muscles was dependent on body position. Clinical Relevance: If a clinician is seeking to integrate trunk muscle activation while performing shoulder ER strengthening, the side plank position is preferred as compared with standing or side lying.