Movement disorders clinical practice · 2023
Assessing the Severity of Cervical Dystonia: Ask the Doctor or Ask the Patient?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Cotton Adam C, Scorr Laura, McDonald William, Comella Cynthia, Perlmutter Joel S, Goetz Christopher G, Jankovic Joseph, Marsh Laura, Factor Stewart, Jinnah H A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Assessing disease severity can be performed using either clinician-rated scales (CRS) or patient-rated outcome (PRO) tools. These two measures frequently demonstrate poor correlations.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if the correlation between a CRS and PRO for motor features of cervical dystonia (CD) improves by accounting for non-motor features.
METHODS: Subjects with CD (N = 209) were evaluated using a CRS (Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale, TWSTRS) and a PRO (Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile, CDIP-58).
RESULTS: Linear regression revealed a weak correlation between the two measures, even when considering only the motor subscales of each. The strength of this relationship improved with a regression model that included non-motor symptoms of pain, depression, and disability.
CONCLUSIONS: These results argue that the results of motor assessments in a PRO for CD cannot be fully appreciated without simultaneous assessment of non-motor co-morbidities. This conclusion might apply to other disorders, especially those with frequent non-motor co-morbidities.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if the correlation between a CRS and PRO for motor features of cervical dystonia (CD) improves by accounting for non-motor features.
METHODS: Subjects with CD (N = 209) were evaluated using a CRS (Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale, TWSTRS) and a PRO (Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile, CDIP-58).
RESULTS: Linear regression revealed a weak correlation between the two measures, even when considering only the motor subscales of each. The strength of this relationship improved with a regression model that included non-motor symptoms of pain, depression, and disability.
CONCLUSIONS: These results argue that the results of motor assessments in a PRO for CD cannot be fully appreciated without simultaneous assessment of non-motor co-morbidities. This conclusion might apply to other disorders, especially those with frequent non-motor co-morbidities.