NeuroRehabilitation · 2013
Diadochokinetic movements differ between patients with Huntington's disease and controls.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Müller Thomas, Saft Carsten, Andrich Jürgen, Harati Ali
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Assessment of impaired motor behaviour serves as tool for diagnosis and for evaluation of progression of chronic neurodegeneration.
METHODS: We measured performance of rapid alternating movements, simple and complex motion series with instruments in scored, drug naïve patients with Huntington's disease and controls.
OBJECTIVES: To compare device outcomes with the ones of controls and to correlate them with each other and with the disease symptoms.
RESULTS: Patients showed lower peak velocities and longer intervals for performance of rapid alternating movements than the controls. On the right dominant side, a correlation was found between intervals needed for standardised alternating movement performance and the simple motion task outcomes in the patients. No relations to the rated disease symptoms appeared.
CONCLUSION: Execution of alternating movements is disturbed in Huntington's disease. Performance of the simple motion task and realisation of alternating motions shares a need for low cognitive efforts. Both ask for a more automated motion execution. Therefore they were related to each other to a certain extent. Execution of complex movement series asks for higher cognitive load, as it demands aiming and planning of movement series with visual input. This motion pattern does not resemble to the realisation of rapid alternating movements.
METHODS: We measured performance of rapid alternating movements, simple and complex motion series with instruments in scored, drug naïve patients with Huntington's disease and controls.
OBJECTIVES: To compare device outcomes with the ones of controls and to correlate them with each other and with the disease symptoms.
RESULTS: Patients showed lower peak velocities and longer intervals for performance of rapid alternating movements than the controls. On the right dominant side, a correlation was found between intervals needed for standardised alternating movement performance and the simple motion task outcomes in the patients. No relations to the rated disease symptoms appeared.
CONCLUSION: Execution of alternating movements is disturbed in Huntington's disease. Performance of the simple motion task and realisation of alternating motions shares a need for low cognitive efforts. Both ask for a more automated motion execution. Therefore they were related to each other to a certain extent. Execution of complex movement series asks for higher cognitive load, as it demands aiming and planning of movement series with visual input. This motion pattern does not resemble to the realisation of rapid alternating movements.