Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Diagnosing Parkinson's disease using videotaped neurological examinations: validity and factors that contribute to incorrect diagnoses.
Mov Disord. 2002 May; 17(3):513-7.MD

Abstract

Field work is commonly required in movement disorders research. Sending neurologists into the field can be logistically challenging and costly. Alternatively, neurological examinations may be videotaped and reviewed later. There is little knowledge of the validity of the videotaped neurological examination in the diagnosis of Parkinson's disease (PD). We examined the validity of the videotaped Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) motor examination in the diagnosis of PD, and sought to determine which factors are associated with incorrect diagnoses. PD patients and controls were enrolled in a familial aggregation study between August of 1998 and June of 2000, and as part of that study each was examined by a physician who performed an in-person UPDRS motor examination. Each also underwent a second, videotaped UPDRS motor examination. Based on the review of this videotape, a neurologist, who was blinded to the previous clinical diagnosis, assigned a diagnosis of PD or normal. A total of 211 of 231 PD patients (sensitivity = 91.3%), and 170 of 172 controls (specificity = 98.8%) were correctly identified based on the videotape. True positives had a higher mean rest tremor score (1.7 vs. 0.3; P < 0.001), action tremor score (0.9 vs. 0.3; P < 0.001), bradykinesia score (11.2 vs. 7.4; P = 0.02), and disease of longer mean duration (8.9 vs. 5.8 years; P = 0.001) than false negatives. False negatives did not differ from true positives in terms of age, total dose of levodopa, Hoehn and Yahr score, or rigidity, gait and posture, or facial masking scores (each assessed during the in-person examination). The videotaped UPDRS motor examination is a useful means of diagnosing PD and provides an alternative approach for the diagnosis of PD in field studies. A limitation is that patients with milder PD of shorter duration may not be recognized as PD.

Authors+Show Affiliations

The Gertrude H. Sergievsky Center, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA. EDL2@columbia.eduNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Language

eng

PubMed ID

12112199

Citation

Louis, Elan D., et al. "Diagnosing Parkinson's Disease Using Videotaped Neurological Examinations: Validity and Factors That Contribute to Incorrect Diagnoses." Movement Disorders : Official Journal of the Movement Disorder Society, vol. 17, no. 3, 2002, pp. 513-7.
Louis ED, Levy G, Côte LJ, et al. Diagnosing Parkinson's disease using videotaped neurological examinations: validity and factors that contribute to incorrect diagnoses. Mov Disord. 2002;17(3):513-7.
Louis, E. D., Levy, G., Côte, L. J., Mejia, H., Fahn, S., & Marder, K. (2002). Diagnosing Parkinson's disease using videotaped neurological examinations: validity and factors that contribute to incorrect diagnoses. Movement Disorders : Official Journal of the Movement Disorder Society, 17(3), 513-7.
Louis ED, et al. Diagnosing Parkinson's Disease Using Videotaped Neurological Examinations: Validity and Factors That Contribute to Incorrect Diagnoses. Mov Disord. 2002;17(3):513-7. PubMed PMID: 12112199.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Diagnosing Parkinson's disease using videotaped neurological examinations: validity and factors that contribute to incorrect diagnoses. AU - Louis,Elan D, AU - Levy,Gilberto, AU - Côte,Lucien J, AU - Mejia,Helen, AU - Fahn,Stanley, AU - Marder,Karen, PY - 2002/7/12/pubmed PY - 2002/9/17/medline PY - 2002/7/12/entrez SP - 513 EP - 7 JF - Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society JO - Mov Disord VL - 17 IS - 3 N2 - Field work is commonly required in movement disorders research. Sending neurologists into the field can be logistically challenging and costly. Alternatively, neurological examinations may be videotaped and reviewed later. There is little knowledge of the validity of the videotaped neurological examination in the diagnosis of Parkinson's disease (PD). We examined the validity of the videotaped Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) motor examination in the diagnosis of PD, and sought to determine which factors are associated with incorrect diagnoses. PD patients and controls were enrolled in a familial aggregation study between August of 1998 and June of 2000, and as part of that study each was examined by a physician who performed an in-person UPDRS motor examination. Each also underwent a second, videotaped UPDRS motor examination. Based on the review of this videotape, a neurologist, who was blinded to the previous clinical diagnosis, assigned a diagnosis of PD or normal. A total of 211 of 231 PD patients (sensitivity = 91.3%), and 170 of 172 controls (specificity = 98.8%) were correctly identified based on the videotape. True positives had a higher mean rest tremor score (1.7 vs. 0.3; P < 0.001), action tremor score (0.9 vs. 0.3; P < 0.001), bradykinesia score (11.2 vs. 7.4; P = 0.02), and disease of longer mean duration (8.9 vs. 5.8 years; P = 0.001) than false negatives. False negatives did not differ from true positives in terms of age, total dose of levodopa, Hoehn and Yahr score, or rigidity, gait and posture, or facial masking scores (each assessed during the in-person examination). The videotaped UPDRS motor examination is a useful means of diagnosing PD and provides an alternative approach for the diagnosis of PD in field studies. A limitation is that patients with milder PD of shorter duration may not be recognized as PD. SN - 0885-3185 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/12112199/Diagnosing_Parkinson's_disease_using_videotaped_neurological_examinations:_validity_and_factors_that_contribute_to_incorrect_diagnoses_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.10119 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -