Faculty Bibliography

Although it is self-evident that education in neurology is important and necessary, how to fund the educational mission is a frequent challenge for neurology departments and clinicians. Department chairs often resort to a piecemeal approach, cobbling together funding for educators from various sources, but frequently falling short. Here, we review the various sources available to fund the educational mission in neurology, understanding that not every department will have access to every source. We describe the multiple different teaching models and formats used by the modern student and educator and their associated costs, some of which are exorbitant. We discuss possible nonfinancial incentives, including pathways to promotion, educational research, and other awards and recognition. Neurological education is commonly underfunded, and departments and institutions must be nimble and creative in finding ways to fund the time and effort of educators.

ABSTRACT/UNASSIGNED:A collection of instructional videos that illustrate a step by step approach to tele-neuro-ophthalmology and neuro-otology visits. These videos provide instruction for patient preparation for their video visit, patient and provider interface with an electronic medical record associated video platform, digital applications to assist with vision testing, and practical advice for detailed remote neuro-ophthalmologic and neuro-otologic examinations.

Objective/UNASSIGNED:The Mobile Universal Lexicon Evaluation System (MULES) is a rapid picture naming task that captures extensive brain networks involving neurocognitive, afferent/efferent visual, and language pathways. Many of the factors captured by MULES may be abnormal in sleep-deprived residents. This study investigates the effect of sleep deprivation in post-call residents on MULES performance. Methods/UNASSIGNED: = 18) and a group of similar-aged controls not taking call (n = 18). Differences in times between baseline and follow-up MULES scores were compared between the two groups. Results/UNASSIGNED: < 0.001, Wilcoxon rank sum test). The change in MULES time from baseline was significantly correlated to the change in subjective level of sleepiness for call residents and to the amount of sleep obtained in the 24 h prior to follow-up testing for the entire cohort. For call residents, the duration of sleep obtained during call did not significantly correlate with change in MULES scores. There was no significant correlation between MULES change and sleep quality questionnaire score for the entire cohort. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:The MULES is a novel test for effects of sleep deprivation on neurocognition and vision pathways. Sleep deprivation significantly worsens MULES performance. Subjective sleepiness may also affect MULES performance. MULES may serve as a useful performance assessment tool for sleep deprivation in residents.

OBJECTIVE:We sought to review the literature on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing in patients with COVID-19 for evidence of viral neuroinvasion by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS:We performed a systematic review of Medline and Embase between December 1, 2019 and November 18, 2020 to identify case reports or series of patients who had COVID-19 diagnosed based on positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or serologic testing and had CSF testing due to a neurologic symptom. RESULTS:We identified 242 relevant documents which included 430 patients with COVID-19 who had acute neurological symptoms prompting CSF testing. Of those, 321 (75%) patients had symptoms that localized to the central nervous system (CNS). Of 304 patients whose CSF was tested for SARS-CoV-2 PCR, there were 17 (6%) whose test was positive, all of whom had symptoms that localized to the central nervous system (CNS). The majority (13/17, 76%) of these patients were admitted to the hospital because of neurological symptoms. Of 58 patients whose CSF was tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibody, 7 (12%) had positive antibodies with evidence of intrathecal synthesis, all of whom had symptoms that localized to the CNS. Of 132 patients who had oligoclonal bands evaluated, 3 (2%) had evidence of intrathecal antibody synthesis. Of 77 patients tested for autoimmune antibodies in the CSF, 4 (5%) had positive findings. CONCLUSION:Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in CSF via PCR or evaluation for intrathecal antibody synthesis appears to be rare. Most neurological complications associated with SARS- CoV-2 are unlikely to be related to direct viral neuroinvasion.

Background: Sideline diagnostic tests for concussion are vulnerable to volitional poor performance ("sandbagging") on baseline assessments, motivated by desire to subvert concussion detection and potential removal from play. We investigated eye movements during sandbagging versus best effort on the King-Devick (KD) test, a rapid automatized naming (RAN) task. Methods: Participants performed KD testing during oculography following instructions to sandbag or give best effort. Results: Twenty healthy participants without concussion history were included (mean age 27 ± 8 years). Sandbagging resulted in longer test times (89.6 ± 39.2 s vs 48.2 ± 8.5 s, p < .001), longer inter-saccadic intervals (459.5 ± 125.4 ms vs 311.2 ± 79.1 ms, p < .001) and greater numbers of saccades (171.4 ± 47 vs 138 ± 24.2, p < .001) and reverse saccades (wrong direction for reading) (21.2% vs 11.3%, p < .001). Sandbagging was detectable using a logistic model with KD times as the only predictor, though more robustly detectable using eye movement metrics. Conclusions: KD sandbagging results in eye movement differences that are detectable by eye movement recordings and suggest an invalid test score. Objective eye movement recording during the KD test shows promise for distinguishing between best effort and post-injury performance, as well as for identifying sandbagging red flags.