# COMPARISON OF THE PREDICTIVE VALUE OF UPPER LIMB SOMATOSENSORY EVOKED POTENTIALS AND MOTOR EVOKED POTENTIALS FOR FUNCTIONAL RECOVERY IN SUBACUTE STROKE: A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY

## TL;DR

This study compares how two nerve tests predict arm and hand recovery in stroke patients during rehabilitation.

## Contribution

The study shows that somatosensory and motor evoked potentials provide complementary information for predicting recovery outcomes in subacute stroke patients.

## Key findings

- Normal somatosensory evoked potentials correlate with better independence in daily activities.
- Normal motor evoked potentials correlate with better hand coordination performance.

## Abstract

To compare the prognostic value of somatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials for upper limb functional recovery in patients with subacute stroke.

Retrospective observational analysis.

A total of 111 inpatients with subacute stroke who underwent upper limb somatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials testing within 1 week of admission and completed a standardized rehabilitation programme.

Somatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials were categorized as non-responsive, abnormal, or normal. Discharge outcomes included the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper limb, Box and Block Test, Functional Independence Measure, and Korean version of the modified Barthel Index. Mixed-effects models were applied to examine associations between somatosensory evoked potentials or motor evoked potentials status and discharge outcomes, adjusting for baseline score and admission duration, with patient ID as a random intercept. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen’s f
2.

Normal somatosensory evoked potentials were associated with higher Functional Independence Measure and Korean version of the modified Barthel Index scores than non-responsive somatosensory evoked potentials, while abnormal somatosensory evoked potentials showed non-significant trends. For motor evoked potentials, the normal group showed higher Box and Block Test scores, and both abnormal and normal groups had higher Korean modified Barthel Index scores than non-responsive.

Admission somatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials provide complementary prognostic information in subacute stroke rehabilitation.

Recovery after stroke varies widely among patients, and predicting who will regain good arm and hand function remains challenging. This study examined whether 2 nerve tests, somatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials, can help predict recovery in people with subacute stroke. We reviewed data from 111 patients who received both tests and completed rehabilitation. Somatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials results were grouped as non-responsive, abnormal, or normal, and their relationships with movement and daily function at discharge were analysed. Patients with normal somatosensory evoked potentials showed greater independence in daily activities, while those with normal motor evoked potentials performed better in hand coordination tasks. These findings suggest that somatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials reflect different aspects of recovery, and when combined may improve early prediction of functional outcomes. This information could help clinicians plan individualized rehabilitation programmes more effectively for patients after stroke.