Roberta Battini1, Ilaria Olivieri2, Roberta Di Pietro3, Manuela Casarano3, Giuseppina Sgandurra3, Domenico M Romeo4, Giovanni Cioni2. 1. Department of Developmental Neuroscience, Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Fondazione Stella Maris, Pisa, Italy. Electronic address: r.battini@fsm.unipi.it. 2. Department of Developmental Neuroscience, Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Fondazione Stella Maris, Pisa, Italy; Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Italy. 3. Department of Developmental Neuroscience, Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Fondazione Stella Maris, Pisa, Italy. 4. Department of Paediatric Neurology, Catholic University, Rome, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Movement Disorder-Childhood Rating Scale represents a new tool for assessment of movement disorders during developmental age. In this study, we evaluated a cohort of 68 patients affected by various types of movement disorders and treated with specific drugs over one year to verify the usefulness of the Movement Disorder-Childhood Rating Scale. METHOD: The participants were divided into two groups according to their ages (0-3 years; 4-18 years) and were evaluated using Movement Disorder-Childhood Rating Scale 0-3 or 4-18 at baseline (i.e., before starting pharmacological treatment [T0], after 6 months [T1], and after 12 months [T2] of treatment. Univariate repeated measures analysis of variance with a Greenhouse-Geisser correction by SPSS 20 was performed to analyze the scale responsiveness for the three indices (e.g., Index I, Index II, Global Index) in each group with time (T0, T1, and T2). In addition, the Bonferroni test was performed to identify the source of significant differences among means. RESULTS: Significant differences were found between time points (T1 versus T0, T2 versus T0, and T2 versus T1) in both scales for all indexes with the exception for T2 versus T1 for Index II in both scales and for T2 versus T1 for the Global Index in the older age group. There was no significant correlation between observed changes in the scores and the age of the children, either for Movement Disorder-Childhood Rating Scale 0-3 or 4-18. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that Movement Disorder-Childhood Rating Scale is a suitable tool to detect changes independently from age and could be used as outcome measure for clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: The Movement Disorder-Childhood Rating Scale represents a new tool for assessment of movement disorders during developmental age. In this study, we evaluated a cohort of 68 patients affected by various types of movement disorders and treated with specific drugs over one year to verify the usefulness of the Movement Disorder-Childhood Rating Scale. METHOD: The participants were divided into two groups according to their ages (0-3 years; 4-18 years) and were evaluated using Movement Disorder-Childhood Rating Scale 0-3 or 4-18 at baseline (i.e., before starting pharmacological treatment [T0], after 6 months [T1], and after 12 months [T2] of treatment. Univariate repeated measures analysis of variance with a Greenhouse-Geisser correction by SPSS 20 was performed to analyze the scale responsiveness for the three indices (e.g., Index I, Index II, Global Index) in each group with time (T0, T1, and T2). In addition, the Bonferroni test was performed to identify the source of significant differences among means. RESULTS: Significant differences were found between time points (T1 versus T0, T2 versus T0, and T2 versus T1) in both scales for all indexes with the exception for T2 versus T1 for Index II in both scales and for T2 versus T1 for the Global Index in the older age group. There was no significant correlation between observed changes in the scores and the age of the children, either for Movement Disorder-Childhood Rating Scale 0-3 or 4-18. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that Movement Disorder-Childhood Rating Scale is a suitable tool to detect changes independently from age and could be used as outcome measure for clinical trials.
Authors: Jacinta Saldaris; Judith Weisenberg; Elia Pestana-Knight; Eric D Marsh; Bernhard Suter; Rajsekar Rajaraman; Gena Heidary; Heather E Olson; Orrin Devinsky; Dana Price; Peter Jacoby; Helen Leonard; Tim A Benke; Scott Demarest; Jenny Downs Journal: J Child Neurol Date: 2021-08-11 Impact factor: 1.987