SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Standardized handwriting to assess bradykinesia, micrographia and tremor in Parkinson's disease.

PLoS One · 2014-05-22

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097614PMID: 24854199

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

ObjectiveTo assess whether standardized handwriting can provide quantitative measures to distinguish patients diagnosed with Parkinson's disease from age- and gender-matched healthy control participants.DesignExploratory study. Pen tip trajectories were recorded during circle, spiral and line drawing and repeated character 'elelelel' and sentence writing, performed by Parkinson patients and healthy control participants. Parkinson patients were tested after overnight withdrawal of anti-Parkinsonian medication.SettingUniversity Medical Center Groningen, tertiary care, the Netherlands.ParticipantsPatients with Parkinson's disease (n = 10; mean age 69.0 years; 6 male) and healthy controls (n = 10; mean age 68.1 years; 6 male).InterventionsNot applicable.Main outcome measuresMovement time and velocity to detect bradykinesia and the size of writing to detect micrographia. A rest recording to investigate the presence of a rest-tremor, by frequency analysis.ResultsMean disease duration in the Parkinson group was 4.4 years and the patients were in modified Hoehn-Yahr stages 1-2.5. In general, Parkinson patients were slower than healthy control participants. Median time per repetition, median velocity and median acceleration of the sentence task and median velocity of the elel task differed significantly between Parkinson patients and healthy control participants (all pConclusionsThis study shows that standardized handwriting can provide objective measures for bradykinesia, tremor and micrographia to distinguish Parkinson patients from healthy control participants.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.