Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Patients with movement disorders such as Parkinson's disease (PD) living in remote and underserved areas often have limited access to specialized healthcare, while the feasibility and reliability of the video-based examination remains unclear. The aim of this narrative review is to examine which parts of remote neurological assessment are feasible and reliable in movement disorders. Clinical studies have demonstrated that most parts of the video-based neurological examination are feasible, even in the absence of a third party, including stance and gait-if an assistive device is not required-bradykinesia, tremor, dystonia, some ocular mobility parts, coordination, and gross muscle power and sensation assessment. Technical issues (video quality, internet connection, camera placement) might affect bradykinesia and tremor evaluation, especially in mild cases, possibly due to their rhythmic nature. Rigidity, postural instability and deep tendon reflexes cannot be remotely performed unless a trained healthcare professional is present. A modified version of incomplete Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS)-III and a related equation lacking rigidity and pull testing items can reliably predict total UPDRS-III. UPDRS-II, -IV, Timed "Up and Go", and non-motor and quality of life scales can be administered remotely, while the remote Movement Disorder Society (MDS)-UPDRS-III requires further investigation. In conclusion, most parts of neurological examination can be performed virtually in PD, except for rigidity and postural instability, while technical issues might affect the assessment of mild bradykinesia and tremor. The combined use of wearable devices may at least partially compensate for these challenges in the future.
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.