Self-Reported Dystonia and Dystonia on Neurological Examination: Prevalence and Concordance across Time in a Prospectively Followed Essential Tremor Cohort.

IF 4 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Tomer O Guy, Diane S Berry, Vibhash D Sharma, Elan D Louis
{"title":"Self-Reported Dystonia and Dystonia on Neurological Examination: Prevalence and Concordance across Time in a Prospectively Followed Essential Tremor Cohort.","authors":"Tomer O Guy, Diane S Berry, Vibhash D Sharma, Elan D Louis","doi":"10.1159/000546428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Screening questions are important in identifying subgroups of individuals within a target population. Dystonic movements and postures are not uncommon in patients with essential tremor (ET). There is a gap in knowledge - no studies have assessed the validity of a self-report of dystonia in ET patients. We assessed the concordance between self-reported dystonia and the presence or absence of dystonia on examination (DOE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We obtained self-report data from 274 ET cases in a serial study with up to five follow-up evaluations. At each assessment, participants could self-report dystonia, and they underwent a detailed neurological examination, from which a movement disorders neurologist assessed for the presence of DOE.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across time, the prevalence of self-reported dystonia and DOE ranged from 0.0% to 4.3% and 8.6% to 17.5%, respectively. There were 74 cases with either self-reported dystonia or DOE; in only 3 (4.1%) was there a positive concordance between the two at each of their evaluations. Values for sensitivity ranged from 0.0% to 40%; specificity from 96.1% to 100%; positive predictive value from 0.0% to 67.0% (median 30.0%); and negative predictive value from 83.1% to 94.4%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study provides important insights into the validity of self-report data on dystonia in ET and the prevalence of DOE in ET. Our findings suggest that self-reported dystonia was not a valid means to identify DOE in ET.</p>","PeriodicalId":54730,"journal":{"name":"Neuroepidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12185053/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroepidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000546428","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Screening questions are important in identifying subgroups of individuals within a target population. Dystonic movements and postures are not uncommon in patients with essential tremor (ET). There is a gap in knowledge - no studies have assessed the validity of a self-report of dystonia in ET patients. We assessed the concordance between self-reported dystonia and the presence or absence of dystonia on examination (DOE).

Methods: We obtained self-report data from 274 ET cases in a serial study with up to five follow-up evaluations. At each assessment, participants could self-report dystonia, and they underwent a detailed neurological examination, from which a movement disorders neurologist assessed for the presence of DOE.

Results: Across time, the prevalence of self-reported dystonia and DOE ranged from 0.0% to 4.3% and 8.6% to 17.5%, respectively. There were 74 cases with either self-reported dystonia or DOE; in only 3 (4.1%) was there a positive concordance between the two at each of their evaluations. Values for sensitivity ranged from 0.0% to 40%; specificity from 96.1% to 100%; positive predictive value from 0.0% to 67.0% (median 30.0%); and negative predictive value from 83.1% to 94.4%.

Conclusion: Our study provides important insights into the validity of self-report data on dystonia in ET and the prevalence of DOE in ET. Our findings suggest that self-reported dystonia was not a valid means to identify DOE in ET.

自我报告的肌张力障碍和神经系统检查中的肌张力障碍:前瞻性随访原发性震颤队列的患病率和一致性。
简介:筛选问题对于确定目标人群中的个体亚群很重要。肌张力障碍运动和姿势在特发性震颤(ET)患者中并不罕见。这是一个知识上的空白——没有研究评估过肌张力障碍患者自我报告的有效性。我们评估了自我报告的肌张力障碍与检查时是否存在肌张力障碍(DOE)之间的一致性。方法:我们在一项系列研究中获得274例ET患者的自我报告数据,并进行了多达5次随访评估。在每次评估中,参与者可以自我报告肌张力障碍,并接受详细的神经学检查,由运动障碍神经科医生评估DOE的存在。结果:随着时间的推移,自我报告的肌张力障碍和DOE的患病率分别为0.0% - 4.3%和8.6% -17.5%。自述肌张力障碍或DOE 74例;只有3个(4.1%)在每项评价中两者之间存在正一致性。灵敏度范围为0.0% - 40%;特异性从96.1% - 100%;阳性预测值为0.0% - 67.0%(中位数30.0%);而阴性预测值,从83.1% - 94.4%不等。结论:我们的研究为ET中肌张力障碍的自我报告数据的有效性和ET中DOE的患病率提供了重要的见解。我们的研究结果表明,自我报告的肌张力障碍并不是识别ET中DOE的有效手段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neuroepidemiology
Neuroepidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
9.90
自引率
1.80%
发文量
49
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''Neuroepidemiology'' is the only internationally recognised peer-reviewed periodical devoted to descriptive, analytical and experimental studies in the epidemiology of neurologic disease. The scope of the journal expands the boundaries of traditional clinical neurology by providing new insights regarding the etiology, determinants, distribution, management and prevention of diseases of the nervous system.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信