ABSTRACT
Objective Cognitive impairment after stroke is common, present up to 60% of survivors. Stroke severity, indicated by both volume and location, is the most consequential predictor of cognitive impairment, with severe strokes predicting higher chances of cognitive impairment. The current investigation examines the associations of two stroke severity ratings and a caregiver-report of post-stroke functioning with longitudinal cognitive outcomes.
Methods The analysis was conducted on 157 caregivers and stroke survivor dyads who participated in the Caring for Adults Recovering from the Effects of Stroke (CARES) project, an ancillary study of the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) national cohort study. Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) collected at hospitalization discharge were included as two primary predictors of cognitive impairment. The number of caregiver-reported problems and impairments at nine months following stroke were included as a third predictor. Cognition was assessed using a biennial telephone battery, incorporating multiple cognitive assessments to assess learning, memory, and executive functioning. Longitudinal cognitive scores were analyzed up to five years post-stroke, controlling for baseline (pre-stroke) cognitive scores and demographic variables of each stroke survivor collected at CARES baseline.
Results Separate mixed models showed significant main effects of GOS (b=0.3280, p=0.0009), mRS (b=-0.2119, p=0.0002), and caregiver-reported impairments (b=-0.0671, p<0.0001) on longitudinal cognitive scores. In a combined model including all three predictors, only caregiver-reported problems significantly predicted cognitive outcomes (b=-0.0480, p<0.0001).
Impact These findings underscore the importance of incorporating caregivers feedback in understanding cognitive consequences of stroke.
Competing Interest Statement
For work unrelated to this manuscript, D. Leann Long received investigator-initiated research support from Amgen, Inc. Otherwise, the authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Funding Statement
The original REGARDS research project is supported by cooperative agreement U01 NS041588 co-funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) and the National Institute on Aging (NIA), National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Service. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NINDS or the NIA. Representatives of the NINDS were involved in the review of the manuscript but were not directly involved in the collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data. The authors thank the other investigators, the staff, and the participants of the REGARDS study for their valuable contributions. A full list of participating REGARDS investigators and institutions can be found at: https://www.uab.edu/soph/regardsstudy/ Funding for the initial CARES ancillary study was provided by an investigator-initiated grant (R01 NS045789, David Roth, PhD, PI) and by a cooperative agreement (U01 NS041588) from the NINDS and the NIA, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services. There was otherwise no external funding for the analysis of this manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Institutional Review Boards of the University of Alabama at Birmingham gave ethical approval for this work (IRB#300009166).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest: For work unrelated to this manuscript, D. Leann Long received investigator-initiated research support from Amgen, Inc. Otherwise, the authors declare no conflicts of interest.
We have reviewed the data and have found that one of the stroke severity variables was incorrectly coding into the dataset as GCS following the hospital chart abstraction. As we have now clarified in the manuscript, the correct scale was the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS). Fortunately, no other major changes were necessary to the manuscript other than areas that describe the scale itself. We have also added another author, J. David Rhodes as he contributed significantly to the revision and data collection.
Data Availability
REGARDS has policies and procedures currently in place to permit access to study data for manuscripts through a review and approval process under the governance of the REGARDS Executive Committee. The corresponding author does not determine how to make the data in this manuscript available. Please contact regardsadmin{at}uab.edu to inquire and request access to the data referred to in the manuscript.
