van Brummelen Emilie M J, Ziagkos Dimitrios, de Boon Wadim M I, Hart Ellen P, Doll Robert J, Huttunen Teppo, Kolehmainen Petteri, Groeneveld Geert Jan
1Centre for Human Drug Research, Zernikedreef 8, Leiden, 2333 CL The Netherlands.
4Pharma Ltd, Turku, Finland.
J Clin Mov Disord. 2020 Apr 7;7:4. doi: 10.1186/s40734-020-00086-7. eCollection 2020.
To quantify pharmacological effects on tremor in patients with essential tremor (ET) or Parkinson's Disease (PD), laboratory-grade accelerometers have previously been used. Over the last years, consumer products such as smartphones and smartwatches have been increasingly applied to measure tremor in an easy way. However, it is unknown how the technical performance of these consumer product accelerometers (CPAs) compares to laboratory-grade accelerometers (LGA). This study was performed to compare the technical performance of CPAs with LGA to measure tremor in patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD) and essential tremor (ET).
In ten patients with PD and ten with ET, tremor peak frequency and corresponding amplitude were measured with 7 different CPAs (Apple iPhone 7, Apple iPod Touch 5, Apple watch 2, Huawei Nexus 6P, Huawei watch, mbientlabMetaWear (MW) watch, mbientlab MW clip) and compared to a LGA (Biometrics ACL300) in resting and extended arm position.
Both in PD and ET patients, the peak frequency of CPAs did not significantly differ from the LGA in terms of limits of agreement. For the amplitude at peak frequency, only the iPhone and MW watch performed comparable to the LGA in ET patients, while in PD patients all methods performed comparable except for the iPod Touch and Huawei Nexus. Amplitude was higher when measured with distally-located CPAs (Clip, iPhone, iPod) compared with proximally-located CPAs (all watches). The variability between subjects was higher than within subjects for frequency (25.1% vs. 13.4%) and amplitude measurement (331% vs. 53.6%). Resting arm position resulted in lower intra-individual variability for frequency and amplitude (13.4 and 53.5%) compared to extended arm position (17.8 and 58.1%).
Peak frequencies of tremor could be measured with all tested CPAs, with similar performance as LGA. The amplitude measurements appeared to be driven by anatomical location of the device and can therefore not be compared. Our results show that the tested consumer products can be used for tremography, allowing at-home measurements, in particular in studies with a cross-over or intra-individual comparison design using the resting arm position.
This trial was registered in the Dutch Competent Authority (CCMO) database with number NL60672.058.17 on May 30th 2017.
为了量化对特发性震颤(ET)或帕金森病(PD)患者震颤的药理作用,此前已使用实验室级加速度计。在过去几年中,智能手机和智能手表等消费产品越来越多地被用于以简便方式测量震颤。然而,这些消费产品加速度计(CPA)的技术性能与实验室级加速度计(LGA)相比如何尚不清楚。本研究旨在比较CPA与LGA在测量帕金森病(PD)和特发性震颤(ET)患者震颤方面的技术性能。
对10例PD患者和10例ET患者,使用7种不同的CPA(苹果iPhone 7、苹果iPod Touch 5、苹果手表2、华为Nexus 6P、华为手表、mbientlab MetaWear(MW)手表、mbientlab MW夹子)测量震颤峰值频率和相应振幅,并与处于休息和伸展手臂位置的LGA(Biometrics ACL300)进行比较。
在PD和ET患者中,就一致性界限而言,CPA的峰值频率与LGA没有显著差异。对于峰值频率处的振幅,在ET患者中只有iPhone和MW手表的表现与LGA相当,而在PD患者中,除了iPod Touch和华为Nexus外,所有方法的表现都相当。与位于近端的CPA(所有手表)相比,使用位于远端的CPA(夹子、iPhone、iPod)测量时振幅更高。受试者之间的频率(25.1%对13.4%)和振幅测量(331%对53.6%)变异性高于受试者内部。与伸展手臂位置(17.8%和58.1%)相比,休息手臂位置导致频率和振幅的个体内变异性更低(13.4%和53.5%)。
所有测试的CPA都可以测量震颤的峰值频率,其性能与LGA相似。振幅测量似乎受设备解剖位置的驱动,因此无法进行比较。我们的结果表明,测试的消费产品可用于震颤描记术,允许在家中进行测量,特别是在采用休息手臂位置的交叉或个体内比较设计的研究中。
本试验于2017年5月30日在荷兰主管当局(CCMO)数据库中注册,编号为NL60672.058.17。