Journal of the neurological sciences · 2020
It's tricky: Rating alleviating maneuvers in cervical dystonia.
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.
Cisneros Elizabeth, Stebbins Glenn T, Chen Qiyu, Vu Jeanne P, Benadof Casey N, Zhang Zheng, Barbano Richard L, Fox Susan H, Goetz Christopher G, Jankovic Joseph, Jinnah Hyder A, Perlmutter Joel S, Adler Charles H, Factor Stewart A, Reich Stephen G, Rodriguez Ramon, Severt Lawrence L, Stover Natividad P, Berman Brian D, Comella Cynthia L, Peterson David A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To investigate hypothesized sources of error when quantifying the effect of the sensory trick in cervical dystonia (CD) with the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS-2), test strategies to mitigate them, and provide guidance for future research on the sensory trick.
METHODS: Previous analyses suggested the sensory trick (or "alleviating maneuver", AM) item be removed from the TWSTRS-2 because of its poor clinimetric properties. We hypothesized three sources of clinimetric weakness for rating the AM: 1) whether patients were given sufficient time to demonstrate their AM; 2) whether patients' CD was sufficiently severe for detecting AM efficacy; and 3) whether raters were inadvertently rating the item in reverse of scale instructions. We tested these hypotheses with video recordings and TWSTRS-2 ratings by one "site rater" and a panel of five "video raters" for each of 185 Dystonia Coalition patients with isolated CD.
RESULTS: Of 185 patients, 23 (12%) were not permitted sufficient testing time to exhibit an AM, 23 (12%) had baseline CD too mild to allow confident rating of AM effect, and 1 site- and 1 video-rater each rated the AM item with a reverse scoring convention. When these confounds were eliminated in step-wise fashion, the item's clinimetric properties improved.
CONCLUSIONS: The AM's efficacy can contribute to measuring CD motor severity by addressing identified sources of error during its assessment and rating. Given the AM's sensitive diagnostic and potential pathophysiologic significance, we also provide guidance on modifications to how AMs can be assessed in future CD research.
METHODS: Previous analyses suggested the sensory trick (or "alleviating maneuver", AM) item be removed from the TWSTRS-2 because of its poor clinimetric properties. We hypothesized three sources of clinimetric weakness for rating the AM: 1) whether patients were given sufficient time to demonstrate their AM; 2) whether patients' CD was sufficiently severe for detecting AM efficacy; and 3) whether raters were inadvertently rating the item in reverse of scale instructions. We tested these hypotheses with video recordings and TWSTRS-2 ratings by one "site rater" and a panel of five "video raters" for each of 185 Dystonia Coalition patients with isolated CD.
RESULTS: Of 185 patients, 23 (12%) were not permitted sufficient testing time to exhibit an AM, 23 (12%) had baseline CD too mild to allow confident rating of AM effect, and 1 site- and 1 video-rater each rated the AM item with a reverse scoring convention. When these confounds were eliminated in step-wise fashion, the item's clinimetric properties improved.
CONCLUSIONS: The AM's efficacy can contribute to measuring CD motor severity by addressing identified sources of error during its assessment and rating. Given the AM's sensitive diagnostic and potential pathophysiologic significance, we also provide guidance on modifications to how AMs can be assessed in future CD research.