Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-24T23:30:37.474Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Correlation between Tapping and Inserting of Pegs in Parkinson's Disease

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2014

Thomas Müller ,
Sandra Schäfer ,
Wilfried Kuhn  and
Horst Przuntek
Thomas Müller
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, St. Josef Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, Gudrunstrasse 56, 44791 Bochum, Germany
Sandra Schäfer
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, St. Josef Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, Gudrunstrasse 56, 44791 Bochum, Germany
Wilfried Kuhn
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, St. Josef Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, Gudrunstrasse 56, 44791 Bochum, Germany
Horst Przuntek
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, St. Josef Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, Gudrunstrasse 56, 44791 Bochum, Germany
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Background:

Various investigators have developed complex quantitative instrumental procedures for objective assessment of parkinsonian motor impairment, since drawbacks of rating scales are interrater variability, subjective impression, and insensitivity to subtle modifications. Objectives: To determine whether performance of inserting of pegs and tapping (i) correlates with each other (ii) differentiates between parkinsonian subjects and healthy controls and (iii) reflects severity of Parkinson's disease (PD). Subjects and

Methods:

In 157 previously untreated idiopathic parkinsonian patients and healthy controls, we measured (i) the total time taken to insert 25 pegs from a rack into a series of appropriate holes in a Purdue pegboard-like apparatus and (ii) the number of taps on a contact board with a contact pencil for a period of 32 seconds for assessment of fine motor skills.

Results:

Results of both tests correlated with each other, differed between parkinsonian subjects and controls and reflected scored severity of PD. Better correlation with intensity of PD was noted with the Purdue pegboard-like task.

Conclusion:

Both tapping and inserting of pegs represent useful tools for objective evaluation of severity of PD. Peg insertion correlated better with disease severity. Both approaches may be useful in future clinical studies.

Résumé:

RÉSUMÉ:Introduction:

Différents investigateurs ont développé des méthodes instrumentales quantitatives complexes pour l'évaluation objective du déficit moteur parkinsonien à cause des inconvénients inhérents aux échelles d'évaluation, soit la variabilité entre les observateurs, la subjectivité et le peu de sensibilité à des modifications subtiles.

Objectifs:

Déterminer si la performance au tapping et à la planche à chevilles (i) sont en corrélées (ii) identifie les parkinsoniens et les contrôles et (iii) reflète la sévérité de la maladie de Parkinson (MP).

Sujets et Méthodes:

Nous avons mesuré (i) le temps total pour transférer 25 chevilles d'un support à une série de trous appropriés dans une planche à chevilles de type Purdue et (ii) le nombre de percussions avec un stylet sur une surface de contact pendant une période de 32 secondes pour évaluer la motricité fine chez 157 patients atteints de MP idiopathique jamais traités.

Résultats:

Les résultats de ces deux tests étaient corrélés entre eux, différaient entre les parkinsoniens et les contrôles et reflétaient la sévérité de la MP. Une meilleure corrélation a été observée entre la sévérité de la MP et la performance à la planche à chevilles de type Purdue.

Conclusion:

Le tapping et la planche à chevilles sont des outils utiles pour évaluer objectivement la sévérité de la MP. La performance à la planche à chevilles a une meilleure corrélation avec la sévérité de la maladie. Les deux approches pourraient s'avérer utiles lors d'études cliniques ultérieures.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 27 , Issue 4 , November 2000 , pp. 311 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © The Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences Inc. 2000

References

1. Henderson, L, Kennard, C, Crawford, TJ, et al. Scales for rating motor impairment in Parkinson’s disease: studies of reliability and convergent validity. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1991; 54: 18–24.Google Scholar
2. Geminiani, G, Cesana, BM, Tamma, F, et al. Interobserver reliability between neurologists in training of Parkinson’s disease rating scales. Amulticenter study. Mov Disord 1991; 6: 330–335.Google Scholar
3. Hely, MA, Chey, T, Wilson, A, et al. Reliability of the Columbia scale for assessing signs of Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 1993; 8: 466–472.Google Scholar
4. Watts, RL, Mandir, AS. Quantitative methods of evaluating Parkinson’s disease. In: Olanow, CW, Lieberman, AN, eds. The Scientific Basis for the Treatment of Parkinson’s Disease. Amsterdam: The Parthenon Publishing Group 1992: 13–32.Google Scholar
5. van Hilten, JJ, Middelkoop, HA, Kuiper, SI, Kramer, CG, Roos, RA. Where to record motor activity: an evaluation of commonly used sites of placement for activity monitors. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1993; 89: 359–362.Google Scholar
6. Tiffin, J. Purdue Pegboard. Chicago: Scientific Research Association (II) 1941.Google Scholar
7. Vingerhoets, FJG, Schulzer, M, Calne, DB, Snow, BJ. Which clinical sign of Parkinson's disease best reflects the nigrostriatal lesion? Ann Neurol 1997; 41: 58–64.Google Scholar
8. Brown, RG, Jahanshahi, M. An unusual enhancement of motor performance during bimanual movement in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1998; 64: 813–816.Google Scholar
9. Brown, RG, Jahanshahi, M, Marsden, CD. The execution of bimanual movements in patients with Parkinson’s, Huntington’s and cerebellar disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1993; 56: 295–297.Google Scholar
10. Jankovic, J, Ben Arie, L, Schwartz, K, et al. Movement and reaction times and fine coordination tasks following pallidotomy. Mov Disord 1999; 14: 57–62.Google Scholar
11. Contin, M, Riva, R, Martinelli, P, et al. Pharmacodynamic modeling of oral levodopa: clinical application in Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1993; 43: 367–371.Google Scholar
12. Maricle, RA, Nutt, JG, Valentine, RJ, Carter, JH. Dose-response relationship of levodopa with mood and anxiety in fluctuating Parkinson’s disease: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Neurology 1995; 45: 1757–1760.Google Scholar
13. Montastruc, JL, Rascol, O, Senard, JM, et al. Sublingual apomorphine in Parkinson’s disease: a clinical and pharmacokinetic study. Clin Neuropharmacol 1991; 14: 432–437.Google Scholar
14. Nutt, JG, Carter, JH, Lea, ES, Woodward, WR. Motor fluctuations during continuous levodopa infusions in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 1997; 12: 285–292.Google Scholar
15. Gordon, AM, Reilmann, R. Getting a grasp on research; does treatment taint testing of parkinsonian patients? Brain 1999; 122:1597–1598.Google Scholar
16. Langston, JW, Widner, H, Goetz, CG, et al. Core assessment program for intracerebral transplantations (CAPIT). Mov Disord 1992; 7:2–13.Google Scholar
17. Fahn, S, Elton, RL and the UPDRS Development Committee. Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale. In: Fahn, S, Marsden, CD, Calne, DB and Goldstein, M, eds. Recent development in Parkinson’s disease. New York: Macmillian Health Care Information, 1987: 153–164.Google Scholar
18. Hoehn, MM, Yahr, MD. Parkinsonism: onset, progression and mortality. Neurology 1967; 17: 427–442.Google Scholar
19. Hughes, AJ, Lees, AJ, Stern, GM. Challenge tests to predict the dopaminergic response in untreated Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1991; 41: 1723–1725.Google Scholar
20. Hughes, AJ, Daniel, SE, Kilford, L, Lees, AJ. Accuracy of clinical diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson’s disease: a clinico-pathological study of 100 cases. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1992; 55:181–184.Google Scholar
21. Müller, Th, Eising, EG, Reiners, C, et al. 2-[123I]-Iodolisuride SPECT visualizes dopaminergic loss in de novo Parkinsonian patients – is it a marker of striatal presynaptic degeneration? Nucl Med Commun 1997; 18/12: 1115–1121.Google Scholar
22. Soliveri, P, Brown, RG, Jahanshahi, M, Marsden, CD. Effect of practice on performance of a skilled motor task in patients with Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1992; 55:454–460.Google Scholar
23. van Hilten, JJ, Hoogland, G, van der Velde, EA, et al. Quantitative assessment of parkinsonian patients by continuous wrist activity monitoring. Clin Neuropharmacol 1993; 16: 36–45.Google Scholar
24. Nagasaki, H, Itoh, H, Maruyama, H, Hashizume, K. Characteristic difficulty in rhythmic movement with aging and its relation to Parkinson’s disease. Exp Aging Res 1988; 14: 171–176.Google Scholar
25. Peters, M, Servos, P, Day, R. Marked sex differences on a fine motor skill task disappear when finger size is used as covariate. J Appl Psychol 1990; 75(1):87–90.Google Scholar
26. Levin, BE, Llabre, MM, Weiner, WJ. Parkinson’s disease and depression: psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1988; 51: 1401–1404.Google Scholar
27. Huber, SJ, Paulson, GW, Shuttleworth, EC. Relationship of motor symptoms, intellectual impairment, and depression in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1988; 51:855–858.Google Scholar
28. Starkstein, SE, Bolduc, PL, Mayberg, HS, Preziosi, TJ, Robinson, RG. Cognitive impairments and depression in Parkinson’s disease; a follow up study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1990; 53: 597–602.Google Scholar
29. Ziv, I, Avraham, M, Michaelov, Y, et al. Enhanced fatigue during motor performance in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1998; 51: 1583–1586.Google Scholar