Assessing the non‐motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease: <scp>MDS</scp>‐<scp>UPDRS</scp> and <scp>NMS</scp> Scale

Martinez‐Martín, Pablo; Chaudhuri, K. Ray; Rojo-Abuín, José-Manuel; Rodríguez‐Blázquez, Carmen; Alvarez-Sanchez, Mario; Arakaki, Tomoko; Bergareche-Yarza, Alberto; Chade, Anabel; Garretto, Nélida; Gershanik, Oscar S.; Kurtis, Mónica; Martínez-Castrillo, Juan Carlos; Mendoza-Rodriguez, Amelia; Moore, Henry; Rodríguez‐Violante, Mayela; Singer, Carlos; Tilley, Barbara C.; Huang, Jing; Stebbins, Glenn T.; Goetz, Christopher G.

doi:10.1111/ene.12165

Cited by 86 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For correlation, Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were calculated. The values of correlation coefficients can indicate weak (0-0.299), moderate (0.300-0.599) and high (0.600-1.000) association 27 .…”

Section: Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Independent validation of Parkinson’s disease Sleep Scale 2nd version (PDSS-2)

Kovács

Horváth

Aschermann

et al. 2015

Sleep Biol. Rhythms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sleep problems are one of the most common non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD). The Parkinson's disease Sleep Scale 2 nd version (PDSS-2) was published in 2011 showing satisfactory clinimetric results. We performed an independent testing of the scale adding further information on its clinimetric properties.In this nationwide study 537 PD patients were enrolled. Besides PDSS-2, we assessed Patient's Global Impression-Severity (PGI) scale on sleep disturbances, Non-motor Symptoms Scale and MDS-UPDRS.Following the Classical Theory of Tests we performed descriptive data analysis, factor analysis, reliability, validity and precision measurements. Subsequently, we evaluated cut-off value for detecting clinically meaningful sleep problems based on receiver operating characteristics analysis.Based on the PGI scale, 161 patients (30.0%) did not reported any sleep problems. Factor analysis revealed almost the same factor structure described by the original PDSS-2 validation study. Cronbach's alpha was 0.863 and all item had good item-total correlation. PDSS-2 demonstrated high convergent validity with Non-Motor Symptoms Scale and Clinical Global Impression-Severity and non-motor part of MDS-UPDRS, and divergent validity with age, gender, education-level, disease-duration and Hoehn-Yahr Stages.Presence of sleep problems was identified by scores >10.5 points on PDSS-2 (sensitivity: 85.3%, specificity: 60.8%, diagnostic accuracy: 78.1%); whereas scores >19.5 points indicated marked sleep-related problems (specificity: 68.5%, sensitivity: 78.0%, diagnostic accuracy: 74.3%).Independent and cross-cultural validation of patient reported outcomes is essential to confirm or reject the findings obtained by the developers of the scale. Our results demonstrate that fundamental clinimetric properties of the PDSS-2 are satisfactory.

show abstract

Section: Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Independent validation of Parkinson’s disease Sleep Scale 2nd version (PDSS-2)

Kovács

Horváth

Aschermann

et al. 2015

Sleep Biol. Rhythms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additional studies of the MDS-UPDRS have included independent validation of the entire scale, validation of part I and part II [16][17][18][19], development of a postural instability gait disorder/ tremor dominant formula [20], and a calibration method for converting UPDRS scores to MDS-UPDRS scores [21]. Further, there is an active translation program aimed at The MDS-UPDRS is copyrighted by the IPMDS and is available on its website (www.movementdisorders.org).…”

Section: Normalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Commonalities and Challenges in the Development of Clinical Trial Measures in Neurology

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As neurologists and neuroscientists, we are trained to evaluate disorders of the nervous system by thinking systematically. Clinically, we think in terms of cognition, behavior, motor function, sensation, balance and co-ordination, and autonomic system function. But when we assess symptoms of neurological disorders for the purpose of drug development, we tend to create disease-specific outcome measures, often using a variety of methods to assess the same types of dysfunction in overlapping, related disorders. To begin to explore the potential to simplify and harmonize the assessment of dysfunction across neurological disorders, a

show abstract

“…The reason for the result showing no significant correlation between the UPDRS-motor exam and ARAT would be the specificity of each measurement. The test performance on the UPDRS-motor exam is based on single-repetition trials as well as optimal functional capability including speech, facial expression, tremor at rest, action or postural tremor of hands, rigidity, finger taps, hand movements, rapid alternating movement of hands, leg agility, arising from chair, posture, gait, postural stability, and body bradykinesia and hypokinesia [14]. However, the ARAT is based on a single trial, including grasp, grip, pinch, and gross movements [6].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationships between upper extremity performance and unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale-motor exam

Hwang

Lee

Chung

2013

PTRS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Clinical measures that quantify upper extremity function are needed for the accurate evaluation of patients and to plan an intervention strategy. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS)-Motor Exam and upper extremity performance as a quantifying clinical tool of upper extremity function in persons with Parkinson's disease. Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Thirty-two idiopathic Parkinson's Disease persons participated in this study. To investigate the relationship between the UPDRS-motor exam, Box and Block test (BBT), and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) by two physical therapists. The examination took up to 1 hour, and the participants were invited to rest between each clinical measure in order to minimize the effects of fatigue. Clinical measures were assessed while the subjects were in the "on" phase of their medication cycle, generally 1-3 hour after taking their anti-Parkinson's medications. Results: In more affected side, the UPDRS-motor exam was significantly negative correlated with the BBT (p<0.05) but it was not significantly correlated with the ARAT. In less affected side, only positively correlation was significantly shown between BBT and ARAT (p<0.05). On the other hand, between BBT and ARAT were not significantly correlated with the UPDRS-motor exam. Conclusions:The UPDRS-motor exam is effective tool which was significantly correlated with manual dexterity in more affected upper extremity. But The UPDRS-motor exam is not effective tool in less affected upper extremity.

show abstract

Assessing the non‐motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease: MDS‐UPDRS and NMS Scale

Abstract: (i) MDS-UPDRS Part I (nM-EDL) and NMSS showed a strong convergent validity; (ii) however, transformed scores using the equations from weighted regression models showed that for patients with the most severe NMS they are not concordant.

Cited by 86 publications

References 25 publications

Independent validation of Parkinson’s disease Sleep Scale 2nd version (PDSS-2)

Independent validation of Parkinson’s disease Sleep Scale 2nd version (PDSS-2)

Commonalities and Challenges in the Development of Clinical Trial Measures in Neurology

Relationships between upper extremity performance and unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale-motor exam

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About