2003
DOI: 10.1159/000070199
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

‘Speech Initiation Hesitation’ following Subthalamic Nucleus Stimulation in a Patient with Parkinson’s Disease

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
(8 reference statements)
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[33][34][35]41 By contrast, some studies using perceptual scales such as the UPDRS generally reveal either no significant speech improvement 38 or even worsening of speech. 37,39,57,58 In order to understand these seemingly conflicting results, the different mechanisms illustrated in our case reports need to be considered: (1) respiratory, phonatory, and articulatory components of speech can be improved like other limb motor function (speech subcomponents are improved); (2) complex coordination of all anatomical substrates involved in speech might not be responsive to STN stimulation (intelligibility is not improved); and (3) current diffusion outside the target or target-related dyskinesias may lead to a worsening of speech intelligibility and seems to be a frequent fact (intelligibility can worsen). 36,39 In other words, item 18 of the UPDRS does not adequately evaluate the often complex speech changes that may result from L-dopa treatment or STN stimulation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[33][34][35]41 By contrast, some studies using perceptual scales such as the UPDRS generally reveal either no significant speech improvement 38 or even worsening of speech. 37,39,57,58 In order to understand these seemingly conflicting results, the different mechanisms illustrated in our case reports need to be considered: (1) respiratory, phonatory, and articulatory components of speech can be improved like other limb motor function (speech subcomponents are improved); (2) complex coordination of all anatomical substrates involved in speech might not be responsive to STN stimulation (intelligibility is not improved); and (3) current diffusion outside the target or target-related dyskinesias may lead to a worsening of speech intelligibility and seems to be a frequent fact (intelligibility can worsen). 36,39 In other words, item 18 of the UPDRS does not adequately evaluate the often complex speech changes that may result from L-dopa treatment or STN stimulation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, presurgical dysarthria can be aggravated by DBS and dysarthria may emerge as a side effect. Re-occurring and aggravated stuttering has been reported in 2 cases of DBS-STN where speech fluency improved considerably when the stimulator was turned off [10,11,12]. However, unilateral DBS-STN to the language-dominant hemisphere has been reported to improve acquired stuttering associated with PD in a case study [13], and bilateral DBS-STN has recently been reported to improve developmental stuttering in another case study [14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the treatments of PD is DBS-STN, which has been shown to cause increased dysfluencies in non-stuttering individuals and re-emerging stuttering in individuals with recovered developmental stuttering. Other studies have shown that DBS-STN decreased existing stuttering [10,11,12,13,14]. …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding DBS of the subthalamic nucleus (STN-DBS), previous studies reported that speech was degraded under stimulation [28,29]. For example, heterogeneity of speech outcomes following STN-DBS was illustrated in one study reporting four cases from among which three patients suffered speech degradation [30].…”
Section: Systematic Review Atkinson-clement Sadat and Pintomentioning
confidence: 99%