Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
PurposeThere is a high demand on spinal surgery in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) but the results are sobering. Although detailed clinical and radiological diagnostics were carried out with great effort and expense, the biodynamic properties of the spine of PD patients have never been considered. We propose a noninvasive method to quantify the impairment of motion abilities in patients with PD.MethodsWe present an analytical cross-sectional study of 21 patients with severe PD. All patients underwent a biodynamic assessment during a standardized movement-choreography. Thus, individual spinal motion profiles of each patient were objectively assessed and compared with a large comparative cohort of individuals without PD. Moreover, clinical scores to quantify motor function and lumbar back pain were collected and X-ray scans of the spine in standing position were taken and analysed.ResultsBiodynamic measurement showed that 36.9% of the assessed motions of all PD patients were severely impaired. Men were generally more functionally impaired than women, in 52% of all motion parameters. The neurological and radiological diagnostics recorded pathological values, of which UPDRS-III ON correlated with findings of the biodynamics assessment (R = 0.52, p = 0.02).ConclusionsThe decision to operate on a PD patient's spine is far-reaching and requires careful consideration. Neurological and radiological scores did not correlate with the biodynamics of the spine. The resulting motion profile could be used as individual predictive factor to estimate whether patients are eligible for spinal surgery or alternative therapies.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.