Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Feb;19(2):218-21.
doi: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2012.10.008. Epub 2012 Oct 25.

Potential reliability and validity of a modified version of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale that could be administered remotely

Affiliations

Potential reliability and validity of a modified version of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale that could be administered remotely

Amir Abdolahi et al. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2013 Feb.

Abstract

Background: By permitting remote assessments of patients and research participants, telemedicine has the potential to reshape clinical care and clinical trials for Parkinson disease. While the majority of the motor Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) items can be conducted visually, rigidity and retropulsion pull testing require hands-on assessment by the rater and are less feasible to perform remotely in patients' homes.

Methods: In a secondary data analysis of the Comparison of the Agonist pramipexole vs. Levodopa on Motor complications in Parkinson's Disease (CALM-PD) study, a randomized clinical trial, we assessed the cross-sectional (baseline and 2 years) and longitudinal (change from baseline to 2 years) reliability of a modified motor UPDRS (removing rigidity and retropulsion items) compared to the standard motor UPDRS (all items) using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), stratified by treatment group. Internal consistency of the modified UPDRS (mUPDRS) was measured using Cronbach's alpha, and concurrent validity was assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) between the standard motor UPDRS and mUPDRS.

Results: The mUPDRS versus standard motor UPDRS is cross-sectionally (ICC ≥ 0.92) and longitudinally (ICC ≥ 0.92) reliable for both treatment groups. High internal consistencies were also observed (α ≥ 0.96). The mUPDRS had high concurrent validity with the standard UPDRS at both time points and longitudinally (r ≥ 0.93, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: A modified version of the motor UPDRS without rigidity and retropulsion pull testing is reliable and valid and may lay the foundation for its use in remote assessments of patients and research participants.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Scatterplots for (A) modified motor UPDRS (mUPDRS) versus standard motor UPDRS at baseline, (B) mUPDRS versus UPDRS at 2-year follow-up, and (C) change from baseline to 2-year follow-up for mUPDRS versus UPDRS. Solid lines represent best-fit linear regression line (plots A and B) and line of identity (plot C). For plots A and B, dashed line represents 95% confidence interval and dotted line represents 95% prediction interval about the best-fit line.

References

    1. Connelly E, Propst S. Investment in U.S. Health Research. 2006 (Research!America). Available: http://www.researchamerica.org/uploads/healthdollar2006.pdf.
    1. Karlawish J, Cary MS, Rubright J, Tenhave T. How redesigning AD clinical trials might increase study partners' willingness to participate. Neurology. 2008;71(23):1883–1888. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dorsey ER, Deuel LM, Voss TS, Finnigan K, George BP, Eason S, et al. Increasing access to specialty care: a pilot, randomized controlled trial of telemedicine for Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord. 2010;25(11):1652–1659. - PubMed
    1. Biglan KM, Voss TS, Deuel LM, Miller D, Eason S, Fagnano M, et al. Telemedicine for the care of nursing home residents with Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord. 2009;24(7):1073–1076. - PubMed
    1. Kerr GK, Worringham CJ, Cole MH, Lacherez PF, Wood JM, Silburn PA. Predictors of future falls in Parkinson disease. Neurology. 2010;75(2):116–124. - PubMed

Publication types