Neurorehabilitation of visual neglect: a narrative review of approaches from A.R. Luria to modern clinical protocols

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Various methods of rehabilitation for patients with neglect syndrome have been developed in cognitive neuropsychology. In contrast, this issue has not been a central focus in Luria’s neuropsychological rehabilitation.

AIM: The aim of this study is to provide a comparative analysis of A.R. Luria’s methods for restoring higher mental functions (HMF) and existing approaches within the cognitive paradigm for rehabilitating patients with left-sided spatial neglect. These approaches will be evaluated based on concepts of “bottom-up” and “top-down” attention processes.

METHODS: The search for studies was conducted in the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and eLIBRARY.RU for the period from 1984 to 2024. Sources were included in the review if they contained information on techniques for overcoming left-sided visual neglect and assessing their effectiveness. The review considered publications across all study designs.

RESULTS: Based on an analysis of 56 publications, this study presents the first comparison between modern rehabilitation methods for left-sided neglect and A.R. Luria’s methods for restoring HMF. This synthesis has enabled a refinement of the existing taxonomy of methods for restoring HMF, leading to the proposal of a novel methodology, which focuses on “expanding/correcting the capabilities of the leading afferentation of the functional system (directed correction)”.

CONCLUSION: It is evident that the extant methodologies for addressing left-sided visual neglect are deficient in terms of efficacy. The most efficacious methods are those aimed at restructuring the functional system and based on arbitrariness and mediation, which largely correlates with “top-down” attention processes.

About the authors

Georgiy K. Stepanov

Lomonosov Moscow State University; Federal Scientific Center of Psychological and Multidisciplinary Research

Email: yurinadd@my.msu.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0009-6950-1333
SPIN-code: 2225-0450

Postgraduate student, Faculty of Psychology, Researcher, Laboratory of Counselling Psychology and Psychotherapy

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

Daria D. Terentiy

Lomonosov Moscow State University; Federal Scientific Center of Psychological and Multidisciplinary Research

Author for correspondence.
Email: yurinadd@my.msu.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0002-9186-9993
SPIN-code: 1964-3310

Postgraduate student, Faculty of Psychology, Researcher, Laboratory of Counselling Psychology and Psychotherapy

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

Victoria А. Propustina

Lomonosov Moscow State University; Federal Scientific Center of Psychological and Multidisciplinary Research

Email: yurinadd@my.msu.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0009-0133-3142
SPIN-code: 1896-6286

Graduate of the Faculty of Psychology, Researcher, Laboratory of Counselling Psychology and Psychotherapy

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

Anatoliy A. Skvortsov

Lomonosov Moscow State University; Federal Scientific Center of Psychological and Multidisciplinary Research

Email: yurinadd@my.msu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0471-4217
SPIN-code: 6368-2850

Cand. Sci (Psychology), Associate Professor, Department of Educational Psychology and Pedagogy, Faculty of Psychology, Researcher, Laboratory of Counseling Psychology and Psychotherapy

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

Maria S. Kovyazina

Lomonosov Moscow State University; Federal Scientific Center of Psychological and Multidisciplinary Research; Russian Сenter of Neurology and Neurosciences

Email: yurinadd@my.msu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1795-6645
SPIN-code: 1570-8446

Dr. Sci (Psychology), Professor, Department of Neuro- and Pathopsychology, Faculty of Psychology, Senior Researcher, Head of the Laboratory of Counselling Psychology and Psychotherapy

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow; Moscow

Nataliya A. Varako

Lomonosov Moscow State University; Federal Scientific Center of Psychological and Multidisciplinary Research; Russian Сenter of Neurology and Neurosciences

Email: yurinadd@my.msu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8310-8169
SPIN-code: 4073-2560

Cand. Sci (Psychology), Senior Researcher, Department of Methodology of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Senior Researcher, Senior Researcher, Laboratory of Counselling Psychology and Psychotherapy

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow; Moscow

Aleksey M. Bukinich

Lomonosov Moscow State University; Federal Scientific Center of Psychological and Multidisciplinary Research

Email: yurinadd@my.msu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0422-4717
SPIN-code: 1979-4642

1st category psychologist, Department of Methodology of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Researcher, Laboratory of Counselling Psychology and Psychotherapy

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

Elizaveta V. Vasyura

Lomonosov Moscow State University

Email: yurinadd@my.msu.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0008-5472-9100
SPIN-code: 4573-4732

Student, Department of Psychology

Russian Federation, Moscow

References

  1. Vallar G. Spatial hemineglect in humans. Trends Cogn Sci. 1998;2(3):87–97. doi: 10.1016/s1364-6613(98)01145-0
  2. Dobrokhotova TA, Bragina NN, Zaitsev OS, et al. [Unilateral spatial agnosia]. Moscow: Kniga Ltd; 1996. Russian.
  3. Moore MJ, Milosevich E, Mattingley JB, et al. The neuroanatomy of visuospatial neglect: A systematic review and analysis of lesion-mapping methodology. Neuropsychologia. 2023;180:108470. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2023.108470
  4. Corbetta M, Shulman GL. Spatial neglect and attention networks. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2011;34:569–599. doi: 10.1146/annurev-neuro-061010-113731
  5. Marshall RS. Rehabilitation approaches to hemineglect. Neurologist. 2009;15(4):185–192. doi: 10.1097/NRL.0b013e3181942894
  6. Qi F, Nitsche MA, Ren X, et al. Top-down and bottom-up stimulation techniques combined with action observation treatment in stroke rehabilitation: a perspective. Front Neurol. 2023;14:1156987. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1156987
  7. Gilbert CD, Li W. Top-down influences on visual processing. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013;14(5):350–363. doi: 10.1038/nrn3476
  8. Carter AR, Barrett AM. Recent advances in treatment of spatial neglect: networks and neuropsychology. Expert Rev Neurother. 2023;23(7):587–601. doi: 10.1080/14737175.2023.2221788
  9. Gammeri R, Iacono C, Ricci R, et al. Unilateral Spatial Neglect After Stroke: Current Insights. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2020;16:131–152. doi: 10.2147/NDT.S171461
  10. Azouvi P, Jacquin-Courtois S, Luauté J. Rehabilitation of unilateral neglect: Evidence-based medicine. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2017;60(3):191–197. doi: 10.1016/j.rehab.2016.10.006
  11. Ben-Yishay Y, Rattok J, Lakin P, et al. Neuropsychological rehabilitation: Quest for a holistic approach. Semin Neurol. 1985;5(3):252–259. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1041522
  12. von Monakow C. [Localisation in the cerebrum and functional deterioration due to cortical lesions]. Wiesbaden: JF Bergmann; 1914. German.
  13. Asratyan EA. [On the principle of relative plasticity of the nervous system]. Trudy Gosudarstvennogo instituta mozga im. V.M. Bekhtereva. 1939;11:172–183. Russian.
  14. Goldstein K. Aftereffects of brain injuries in war: their evaluation and treatment. New York: Grune & Stratton; 1942.
  15. Luria AR. Traumatic aphasia: its syndromes, psychology, and treatment. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co; 1970.
  16. Luria AR. Restoration of function after brain injury. New York: MacMillian; 1963.
  17. Mecacci L. Luria’s first steps in neuropsychology. Cortex. 2024;181:133–139. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2024.10.003
  18. Baulina ME, Skvortsov AA, Kovyazina MS, et al. Luria’s Approach to the Restoration of Speech in Aphasia and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICFDH). Psychology in Russia: State of the Art. 2019;12(1):118–128. doi: 10.11621/pir.2019.0109
  19. Allilaire JF, Widlocher D. [Etiopathogeneic aspects of inhibition. Psychodynamic approach to inhibition]. Encephale. 1978;4(5 Suppl):473–480. French.
  20. Kesikburun S. Non-invasive brain stimulation in rehabilitation. Turk J Phys Med Rehabil. 2022;68(1):1–8. doi: 10.5606/tftrd.2022.10608
  21. Lefaucheur JP, Antal A, Ayache SS, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Clin Neurophysiol. 2017;128(1):56–92. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2016.10.087
  22. González-Rodriguez B, Serradell-Ribé N, Viejo-Sobera R, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation in neglect rehabilitation after stroke: a systematic review. J Neurol. 2022;269(12):6310–6329. doi: 10.1007/s00415-022-11338-x
  23. Fan J, Li Y, Yang Y, et al. Efficacy of Noninvasive Brain Stimulation on Unilateral Neglect After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2018;97(4):261–269. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000834
  24. Polejaeva E, Woods AJ. Behavioral inattention test (BIT). In: Kreutzer JS, DeLuca J, Caplan B, editors. Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology. Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 542–544. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-57111-9_9134
  25. Singh-Curry V, Husain M. Rehabilitation in practice: Hemispatial neglect: approaches to rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil. 2010;24(8):675–684. doi: 10.1177/0269215509357851
  26. Millot S, Beis JM, Pierret J, et al. Innovative Therapy Combining Neck Muscle Vibration and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Association with Conventional Rehabilitation in Left Unilateral Spatial Neglect Patients: HEMISTIM Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. Brain Sci. 2023;13(4):678. doi: 10.3390/brainsci13040678
  27. Baker BJ, Bennison AM, Rohde KJ, et al. Effectiveness of visual scanning training at reducing left neglect: a systematic review. Open Access J Neurol Neurosurg. 2019;10(2):15–25. doi: 10.19080/OAJNN.2019.10.555781
  28. Priftis K, Passarini L, Pilosio C, et al. Visual Scanning Training, Limb Activation Treatment, and Prism Adaptation for Rehabilitating Left Neglect: Who is the Winner? Front Hum Neurosci. 2013;7:360. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00360
  29. Luukkainen-Markkula R, Tarkka IM, Pitkänen K, et al. Rehabilitation of hemispatial neglect: A randomized study using either arm activation or visual scanning training. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2009;27(6):663–672. doi: 10.3233/RNN-2009-0520
  30. van Kessel ME, Geurts AC, Brouwer WH, et al. Visual Scanning Training for Neglect after Stroke with and without a Computerized Lane Tracking Dual Task. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013;7:358. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00358
  31. van Wyk A, Eksteen CA, Rheeder P. The effect of visual scanning exercises integrated into physiotherapy in patients with unilateral spatial neglect poststroke: a matched-pair randomized control trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2014;28(9):856–873. doi: 10.1177/1545968314526306
  32. Spaccavento S, Cellamare F, Cafforio E, et al. Efficacy of visual-scanning training and prism adaptation for neglect rehabilitation. Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2016;23(5):313–321. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2015.1038386
  33. Robertson IH, North N. Spatio-motor cueing in unilateral left neglect: the role of hemispace, hand and motor activation. Neuropsychologia. 1992;30(6):553–563. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(92)90058-t
  34. Robertson IH, Tegnér R, Tham K, et al. Sustained attention training for unilateral neglect: theoretical and rehabilitation implications. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1995;17(3):416–430. doi: 10.1080/01688639508405133
  35. Manly T. Cognitive rehabilitation for unilateral neglect: review. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2002;12(4):289–310. doi: 10.1080/0960201044000101
  36. Winson R, Wilson BA, Bateman A, editors. The brain injury rehabilitation workbook. New York: Guilford Publications; 2016.
  37. Niemeier JP. The Lighthouse Strategy: use of a visual imagery technique to treat visual inattention in stroke patients. Brain Inj. 1998;12(5):399–406. doi: 10.1080/026990598122511
  38. Kovyazina MS, Varako NA, Stepanov GK, et al. [Theoretical foundations for the use of the lighthouse strategy in the rehabilitation of patients with neglect syndrome]. Lurian Journal. 2024;5(3):8–28. Russian. doi: 10.15826/Lurian.2024.5.3.1
  39. Karnath HO, Dieterich M. Spatial neglect – a vestibular disorder? Brain. 2006;129(Pt 2):293–305. doi: 10.1093/brain/awh698
  40. Dlugaiczyk J, Gensberger KD, Straka H. Galvanic vestibular stimulation: from basic concepts to clinical applications. J Neurophysiol. 2019;121(6):2237–2255. doi: 10.1152/jn.00035.2019
  41. Wheeler C, Smith LJ, Sakel M, et al. A systematic review of vestibular stimulation in post-stroke visual neglect. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2025;35(2):408–440. doi: 10.1080/09602011.2024.2338603
  42. Kerkhoff G, Keller I, Artinger F, et al. Recovery from auditory and visual neglect after optokinetic stimulation with pursuit eye movements–transient modulation and enduring treatment effects. Neuropsychologia. 2012;50(6):1164–1177. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.09.032
  43. Leontiev AN, Zaporozhets AV. [Restoring movement: psychophysiological study of hand function restoration after injury]. Moscow: Sovetskaya nauka; 1945. Russian.
  44. Duncan J. Selective attention and the organization of visual information. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1984;113(4):501–517. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.113.4.501
  45. Posner MI, Walker JA, Friedrich FJ, et al. Effects of parietal injury on covert orienting of attention. J Neurosci. 1984;4(7):1863–1874. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.04-07-01863.1984
  46. Turgut N, Möller L, Dengler K, et al. Adaptive Cueing Treatment of Neglect in Stroke Patients Leads to Improvements in Activities of Daily Living: A Randomized Controlled, Crossover Trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2018;32(11):988–998. doi: 10.1177/1545968318807054
  47. Schenke N, Franke R, Puschmann S, et al. Can auditory cues improve visuo-spatial neglect? Results of two pilot studies. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2021;31(5):710–730. doi: 10.1080/09602011.2020.1727931
  48. Robertson IH, McMillan TM, MacLeod E, et al. Rehabilitation by limb activation training reduces left-sided motor impairment in unilateral neglect patients: A single-blind randomised control trial. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2002;12(5):439–454. doi: 10.1080/09602010244000228
  49. Kaufmann BC, Cazzoli D, Bartolomeo P, et al. Auditory spatial cueing reduces neglect after right-hemispheric stroke: A proof of concept study. Cortex. 2022;148:152–167. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2021.12.009
  50. Shipkova KM, Bulygina VG. [Neuropsychological and neurobiological basis for the recovery of higher brain functions. Modularity VS theory of system and dynamic localization of functions]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 14. Psikhologiya. 2023;46(3):166–188. Russian. doi: 10.11621/LPJ-23-32
  51. Gouret A, Le Bars S, Porssut T, et al. Advancements in brain-computer interfaces for the rehabilitation of unilateral spatial neglect: a concise review. Front Neurosci. 2024;18:1373377. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2024.1373377
  52. Saj A, Pierce JE, Ronchi R, et al. Real-time fMRI and EEG neurofeedback: A perspective on applications for the rehabilitation of spatial neglect. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2021;64(5):101561. doi: 10.1016/j.rehab.2021.101561
  53. Rossetti Y, Rode G, Pisella L, et al. Prism adaptation to a rightward optical deviation rehabilitates left hemispatial neglect. Nature. 1998;395(6698):166–169. doi: 10.1038/25988
  54. Li J, Li L, Yang Y, et al. Effects of Prism Adaptation for Unilateral Spatial Neglect After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2021;100(6):584–591. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000001598
  55. Rode G, Lacour S, Jacquin-Courtois S, et al. Long-term sensorimotor and therapeutical effects of a mild regime of prism adaptation in spatial neglect. A double-blind RCT essay. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2015;58(2):40–53. doi: 10.1016/j.rehab.2014.10.004
  56. Székely O, Ten Brink AF, Mitchell AG, et al. No short-term treatment effect of prism adaptation for spatial neglect: An inclusive meta-analysis. Neuropsychologia. 2023;189:108566. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2023.108566
  57. Bourgeois A, Turri F, Schnider A, et al. Virtual prism adaptation for spatial neglect: A double-blind study. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2022;32(6):1033–1047. doi: 10.1080/09602011.2020.1864412
  58. Overman MJ, Binns E, Milosevich ET, et al. Recovery of Visuospatial Neglect with Standard Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Stroke. 2024;55(9):2325–2339. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.124.046760
  59. Tavaszi I, Nagy AS, Szabo G, et al. Neglect syndrome in post-stroke conditions: assessment and treatment (scoping review). Int J Rehabil Res. 2021;44(1):3–14. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000438
  60. Sugimoto S, Fujino Y. Neglected-Field Eye Patching Improves Visual Inattention in Hemispatial Neglect: A Case Study. Prog Rehabil Med. 2017;2:20170012. doi: 10.2490/prm.20170012
  61. Machner B, Könemund I, Sprenger A, et al. Randomized controlled trial on hemifield eye patching and optokinetic stimulation in acute spatial neglect. Stroke. 2014;45(8):2465–2468. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.006059
  62. Varako NA. [The emergence of neurorehabilitation. The first rehabilitation programmes]. Vestnik vosstanovitel’noj mediciny. 2014;(2):76–83. Russian.
  63. Zhang Y, Xing Y, Li C, et al. Mirror therapy for unilateral neglect after stroke: A systematic review. Eur J Neurol. 2022;29(1):358–371. doi: 10.1111/ene.15122
  64. Barbara JB, Anna MB, Kelly JR, et al. Effectiveness of Visual Scanning Training at Reducing Left Neglect: A Systematic Review. Open Access J Neurol Neurosurg. 2019;10(2):555781. doi: 10.19080/OAJNN.2019.10.555781
  65. Gandhi DB, Sterba A, Khatter H, et al. Mirror Therapy in Stroke Rehabilitation: Current Perspectives. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2020;16:75–85. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S206883
  66. Fong KNK, Ting KH, Zhang X, et al. The Effect of Mirror Visual Feedback on Spatial Neglect for Patients after Stroke: A Preliminary Randomized Controlled Trial. Brain Sci. 2023;13(1):3. doi: 10.3390/brainsci13010003
  67. Matsumoto N, Nakai R, Ino T, et al. Brain activity associated with the rubber foot illusion. Neurosci Lett. 2020;721:134820. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2020.134820
  68. Matys-Popielska K, Popielski K, Sibilska-Mroziewicz A. Study of the Possibility of Using Virtual Reality Application in Rehabilitation among Elderly Post-Stroke Patients. Sensors (Basel). 2024;24(9):2745. doi: 10.3390/s24092745
  69. Zinchenko YuP, Menshikova GYa, Bayakovsky YuM, et al. [Virtual reality technology in the context of world and national psychology: methodological aspects, achievements and prospects]. Nacional’nyj psikhologicheskij zhurnal. 2010;(2):64–71. Russian.
  70. Cavedoni S, Cipresso P, Mancuso V, et al. Virtual reality for the assessment and rehabilitation of neglect: where are we now? A 6-year review update. Virtual Real. 2022;26(4):1663–1704. doi: 10.1007/s10055-022-00648-0
  71. Shaikh MT, Younas U, Irshad I, et al. Rehabilitation of hemispatial neglect in stroke. J Pak Med Assoc. 2022;72(4):779–781. doi: 10.47391/JPMA.22-32
  72. Barrett AM, Houston KE. Update on the Clinical Approach to Spatial Neglect. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2019;19(5):25. doi: 10.1007/s11910-019-0940-0
  73. Guilbert A. Clinical assessment of unilateral spatial neglect dissociations and heterogeneities: A narrative synthesis. Neuropsychology. 2023;37(4):450–462. doi: 10.1037/neu0000841
  74. Cicerone KD, Goldin Y, Ganci K, et al. Evidence-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation: Systematic Review of the Literature From 2009 Through 2014. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100(8):1515–1533. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2019.02.011

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2025 Stepanov G.K., Terentiy D.D., Propustina V.А., Skvortsov A.A., Kovyazina M.S., Varako N.A., Bukinich A.M., Vasyura E.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).