Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundThe Movement Disorders Society (MDS)-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) is increasingly used to assess motor dysfunction before and after subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS).ObjectivesWe, therefore, investigated whether the MDS-UPDRS can detect longitudinal changes in motor function after STN-DBS in the same way as UPDRS.MethodsWe examined 21 patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) (mean age 59.2 ± 10.6 years, mean disease duration 12.0 ± 3.0 years) who underwent STN-DBS and whose motor functions were assessed by the UPDRS and MDS-UPDRS before, 3 months after, and 1 year after STN-DBS. We then evaluated the consistency between the scores of Parts II and III of the UPDRS and MDS-UPDRS during the off phase using Lin's concordance coefficient (LCC) and a Bland-Altman plot.ResultsThe scores of Parts II and III of both the UPDRS and MDS-UPDRS were significantly decreased 3 months and 1 year after STN-DBS during the off phase. Scores of the UPDRS and MDS-UPDRS showed significant positive correlations before and after STN-DBS. We calculated estimated MDS-UPDRS scores from the UPDRS scores using a regression line and calculated the LCC between the MDS-UPDRS and the estimated MDS-UPDRS scores. The LCC value was 0.59-0.91, which suggests a relatively high consistency between the UPDRS and MDS-UPDRS. The Bland-Altman plot showed that differences between both scores were basically within ±1.96 standard deviations of the difference.ConclusionThe present preliminary study indicated that the utility of the MDS-UPDRS in evaluating motor function before and after STN-DBS demonstrates its potential equivalency to the UPDRS.
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.