Araştırma özeti
Aşağıdaki metin kaynak makalenin lisansı doğrulanmış orijinal özetidir. cc by
Abstract Background: Subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS) is an established therapy for Parkinson’s disease (PD), yet programming relies heavily on subjective feedback. Visual analogue scales (VAS) have been proposed to structure patient-reported outcome measures during programming, but their psychometric reliability has not been systematically assessed. Objective: To evaluate the reliability and contextual stability of VAS ratings in STN-DBS programming. Methods: Fifteen patients with bilateral STN-DBS underwent four structured experiments: (i) test–retest consistency, (ii) effect of stimulation duration (15, 60, 120 s), (iii) impact of unilateral DBS withdrawal intervals (0, 10, 30 min), and (iv) contralateral stimulation ON versus OFF. Across experiments, patients provided >3,000 VAS ratings. Reliability was analyzed using correlation, regression, and Bland–Altman methods, with subgroup analyses by motor phenotype, cognition, and disease burden. Results: VAS ratings showed strong test–retest reliability (r = 0.70, R² = 0.53), with 83% of repeated scores within ±2 points. Reliability was reduced in tremor-onset compared to non-tremor patients (p = 0.04), but unaffected by cognition or quality of life. Stimulation duration influenced absolute scores, with 15 s ratings systematically lower than 60–120 s (p Conclusions: VAS ratings provide reproducible, quantifiable feedback during STN-DBS programming, though reliability depends on motor phenotype, stimulation duration, and bilateral context. Incorporating structured VAS feedback may enhance programming workflows, remote care models, and future multimodal closed-loop DBS strategies.
Bilimsel değerlendirme
Araştırma sorusu
Sorunun kapsamı orijinal çalışma üzerinden değerlendirilir.
Yöntem ve örneklem
Çalışma tasarımı ve örneklem için kaynak makaleyi kontrol edin.
Temel bulgular
Bu kayıt için editoryal olarak onaylanmış bulgu özeti henüz yayımlanmadı.
Sınırlılıklar
Sonuçların genellenebilirliği, yanlılık ve klinik anlamı ayrıca incelenmelidir.
Bibliyografik veriden yöntem, örneklem veya klinik sonuç çıkarımı yapılmaz.