SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Using Synchronization Analysis of Gait Dynamics.

Biomed Res Int · 2021-08-25

DOI: 10.1155/2021/5651519PMID: 34485517

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Analysis of gait dynamics is a noninvasive and totally painless test, and it can be an ideal method for the diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases. In this study, based on the strength of synchronization between dynamics of strides, we have suggested a rating scale method for Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods. The sample included 15 persons with PD (age: 66.8 ± 10.9 years) and 16 healthy persons (age: 39.3 ± 18.5 years) which were recruited from the Neurology Outpatient Clinic at Massachusetts General Hospital and were instructed to walk a 77 m long, straight hallway. The time interval of strides and subphases of strides were measured. Using the Hilbert transformation method, we obtained the data phase and used mean absolute error (MAE) to calculate the synchronization strength of the data phase. Results. In order to check the accuracy of our method, we measured the correlation between our numerical results (MAE) and values of the Hoehn-Yahr scale. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (r) and the P values were calculated. MAE of left and right stride intervals (LRSI) significantly correlates with the Hoehn-Yahr scale for the subjects with PD (with r = 0.60 and P = 0.025 Conclusion. We have revealed that the synchronization weakness of LRSI shows the severity of PD. This method seems to be well suited as a rating scale for people with PD.

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.