Can Motor Arrests in Other Effectors Be Used as Valid Markers of Freezing of Gait?

DʼCruz, Nicholas; Nieuwboer, Alice

doi:10.3389/fnhum.2021.808734

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Patients with a longer disease duration and freezing of gait were under-represented in our cohort (66% in H&Y stage II). Capturing freezing episodes during finger tapping (not detected in this study) could be influenced by medication response (D'Cruz and Nieuwboer 2021 ). Also, people with tremor or cognitive decline could have compromised test–retest reliability and were not included in the current analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

A smartphone-based tapping task as a marker of medication response in Parkinson’s disease: a proof of concept study

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tapping tasks have the potential to distinguish between ON–OFF fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease (PD) possibly aiding assessment of medication status in e-diaries and research. This proof of concept study aims to assess the feasibility and accuracy of a smartphone-based tapping task (developed as part of the cloudUPDRS-project) to discriminate between ON–OFF used in the home setting without supervision. 32 PD patients performed the task before their first medication intake, followed by two test sessions after 1 and 3 h. Testing was repeated for 7 days. Index finger tapping between two targets was performed as fast as possible with each hand. Self-reported ON–OFF status was also indicated. Reminders were sent for testing and medication intake. We studied task compliance, objective performance (frequency and inter-tap distance), classification accuracy and repeatability of tapping. Average compliance was 97.0% (± 3.3%), but 16 patients (50%) needed remote assistance. Self-reported ON–OFF scores and objective tapping were worse pre versus post medication intake (p < 0.0005). Repeated tests showed good to excellent test–retest reliability in ON (0.707 ≤ ICC ≤ 0.975). Although 7 days learning effects were apparent, ON–OFF differences remained. Discriminative accuracy for ON–OFF was particularly good for right-hand tapping (0.72 ≤ AUC ≤ 0.80). Medication dose was associated with ON–OFF tapping changes. Unsupervised tapping tests performed on a smartphone have the potential to classify ON–OFF fluctuations in the home setting, despite some learning and time effects. Replication of these results are needed in a wider sample of patients. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00702-023-02659-w.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%