Suppr超能文献

震颤研究小组特发性震颤评定量表(TETRAS):评估不同项目说明和程序的影响。

Tremor Research Group Essential Tremor Rating Scale (TETRAS): Assessing Impact of Different Item Instructions and Procedures.

机构信息

Methodist Neurological Institute, Houston, TX, US.

Weill Cornell Medical School, US.

出版信息

Tremor Other Hyperkinet Mov (N Y). 2020 Oct 5;10:36. doi: 10.5334/tohm.64.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The Tremor Research Group Essential Tremor Rating Scale (TETRAS) is a well-validated instrument to assess essential tremor. However, similar to all other tremor rating scales, specific instructions for individual tasks are based mostly on expert opinion and tradition. Several tasks have multiple possible variations that have never been compared to determine if they impact score.

METHODS

Using blinded, randomized videotapes, a group of tremor experts evaluated multiple ET patients to determine: 1. whether assessments of spirals and writing samples are similar if the rater only sees the end result as opposed to actually watching the task, 2. whether arm tremor ratings (postural and wing-beating) are similar if the subjects hold both hands out concurrently vs. if they only hold one arm out at a time, 3. whether heal to shin tremor scores vary between supine and sitting, and 4. compared cursive vs script writing samples.

RESULTS

Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were excellent (>0.95) for all arm assessments. Writing tremor was rated worse if only rating the spiral/writing photos (p < 0.05) rather than also viewing the writing process, arm tremor scores were higher if each arm was rated individually (p < 0.001), heal to shin scores were higher when done sitting (p = 0.01), and cursive writing tended to be rated higher than script (p = 0.08).

DISCUSSION

Minor procedure differences when administering the TETRAS can significantly alter results.

摘要

简介

震颤研究小组特发性震颤评定量表(TETRAS)是一种经过充分验证的评估特发性震颤的工具。然而,与所有其他震颤评定量表一样,个别任务的具体说明主要基于专家意见和传统。有几个任务有多种可能的变化,这些变化从未进行过比较,以确定它们是否会影响评分。

方法

使用盲法、随机录像带,一组震颤专家评估了多名 ET 患者,以确定:1. 如果评分者仅看到最终结果而不是实际观察任务,评估螺旋和书写样本是否相似;2. 如果受试者同时伸出双手而不是一次伸出一只手臂,手臂震颤评分(姿势性和翼状震颤)是否相似;3. 仰卧位和坐位时足跟至胫骨震颤评分是否不同;4. 草书与脚本书写样本的比较。

结果

所有手臂评估的组内相关系数(ICC)均非常高(>0.95)。如果仅对螺旋/书写照片进行评分(p < 0.05)而不是同时观察书写过程,则书写震颤的评分更差;如果分别对每个手臂进行评分,则手臂震颤评分更高(p < 0.001);如果坐位进行,则足跟至胫骨评分更高(p = 0.01);草书的评分往往高于脚本(p = 0.08)。

讨论

在进行 TETRAS 时,轻微的程序差异可能会显著改变结果。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3c9c/7546108/2058c2900eea/tohm-10-1-64-g1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验