Elan D Louis1, Pam Factor-Litvak. 1. Department of Neurology, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Conn., USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are nearly no published screening instruments for essential tremor (ET). This is a remarkable fact, given its high prevalence. Here, we assess the validity of a screening questionnaire and hand-drawn spirals and also estimate the prevalence of ET in a community sample. METHODS: Four hundred nineteen study subjects living in a geographically defined area in the New York metropolitan area were contacted using a random digit telephone dialing scheme. Seven tremor screening questions were administered and each subject drew 2 spirals. A movement disorders neurologist assigned ET diagnoses based on neurological examination. RESULTS: The spirals were a more sensitive test than the screening questions (73.7 vs. 26.3%); specificities of the 2 tests were similar (95.5 vs. 96.8%). The combination of both tests was not superior to the use of spirals alone. The positive predictive value of the spiral test was 43.8%. The crude prevalence of ET, 19 of 419 (4.53%, 95% CI 2.92-6.97), increased with age (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: A screening spiral was more sensitive than a screening questionnaire for ET and was moderately sensitive. Nearly one-half of subjects who screened positive had ET; therefore, when screening a population, one can expect the number of true positives and false positives to be roughly equivalent.
BACKGROUND: There are nearly no published screening instruments for essential tremor (ET). This is a remarkable fact, given its high prevalence. Here, we assess the validity of a screening questionnaire and hand-drawn spirals and also estimate the prevalence of ET in a community sample. METHODS: Four hundred nineteen study subjects living in a geographically defined area in the New York metropolitan area were contacted using a random digit telephone dialing scheme. Seven tremor screening questions were administered and each subject drew 2 spirals. A movement disorders neurologist assigned ET diagnoses based on neurological examination. RESULTS: The spirals were a more sensitive test than the screening questions (73.7 vs. 26.3%); specificities of the 2 tests were similar (95.5 vs. 96.8%). The combination of both tests was not superior to the use of spirals alone. The positive predictive value of the spiral test was 43.8%. The crude prevalence of ET, 19 of 419 (4.53%, 95% CI 2.92-6.97), increased with age (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: A screening spiral was more sensitive than a screening questionnaire for ET and was moderately sensitive. Nearly one-half of subjects who screened positive had ET; therefore, when screening a population, one can expect the number of true positives and false positives to be roughly equivalent.
Authors: Manuel Seijo-Martínez; María Castro Del Río; Jose Ramon Rodríguez Alvarez; Ramon Suarez Prado; Eugenio Torres Salgado; Javier Paz Esquete; Maria Jesus Sobrido-Gómez Journal: Tremor Other Hyperkinet Mov (N Y) Date: 2013-09-03
Authors: Elan D Louis; James H Meyers; Olufunmilayo M Badejo; Ashley D Cristal; Ruby Hickman; Pam Factor-Litvak Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 2018-01-16 Impact factor: 3.282