Glenn Nielsen1,2, Luciana Ricciardi3, Anne Marthe Meppelink4, Kate Holt3, Tiago Teodoro3,5,6, Mark Edwards3. 1. Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders UCL Institute of Neurology Queen Square London WC1N 3BG United Kingdom. 2. Therapy Services Department National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery Queen Square London WC1N 3BG United Kingdom. 3. Institute of Cardiovascular and Cell Sciences St Georges University of London London SW17 0RE United Kingdom. 4. Department of Neurology University Medical Centre Groningen University of Groningen Groningen the Netherlands. 5. Instituto de Medicina Molecular Faculdade de Medicina Universidade de Lisboa Lisboa Portugal. 6. Serviço de Neurologia Hospital de Santa Maria Lisboa Portugal.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Psychogenic Movement Disorders Rating Scale (PMDRS) has potential as a useful objective assessment in clinical research, but the current scale has limitations. We developed a simplified version (S-FMDRS) and assessed inter-rater reliability, concurrent validity, and sensitivity. METHODS: Fifty-two videos of subjects with functional (psychogenic) movement disorders (FMD) were rated according to the PMDRS and S-FMDRS by three neurologists. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement of symptomatic body regions and movement disorder classification was assessed using Light's kappa. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to assess concurrent validity. A physiotherapist also rated videos on the S-FMDRS. The simplified scale was piloted in a feasibility study of physiotherapy for FMD to assess sensitivity. RESULTS: ICC of total scores was 0.84 for the original scale and 0.85 for the simplified scale. Light's kappa for agreement of symptomatic body regions and movement disorder classification was moderate to low. Concurrent validity was demonstrated by Spearman's correlation between the two scales ranging from 0.84 to 0.95. The simplified scale was sensitive to change, with an effect size in the feasibility study of 0.79. Inter-rater reliability between physiotherapist and neurologist was high (ICC 0.85). DISCUSSION: Both versions of the scale had good inter-rater reliability for the total score. Low agreement on movement disorder classification and identification of symptomatic body regions support our argument for a simplified scale. CONCLUSIONS: The S-FMDRS has high inter-rater reliability and good sensitivity to change. Further psychometric evaluation is warranted.
BACKGROUND: The Psychogenic Movement Disorders Rating Scale (PMDRS) has potential as a useful objective assessment in clinical research, but the current scale has limitations. We developed a simplified version (S-FMDRS) and assessed inter-rater reliability, concurrent validity, and sensitivity. METHODS: Fifty-two videos of subjects with functional (psychogenic) movement disorders (FMD) were rated according to the PMDRS and S-FMDRS by three neurologists. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement of symptomatic body regions and movement disorder classification was assessed using Light's kappa. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to assess concurrent validity. A physiotherapist also rated videos on the S-FMDRS. The simplified scale was piloted in a feasibility study of physiotherapy for FMD to assess sensitivity. RESULTS: ICC of total scores was 0.84 for the original scale and 0.85 for the simplified scale. Light's kappa for agreement of symptomatic body regions and movement disorder classification was moderate to low. Concurrent validity was demonstrated by Spearman's correlation between the two scales ranging from 0.84 to 0.95. The simplified scale was sensitive to change, with an effect size in the feasibility study of 0.79. Inter-rater reliability between physiotherapist and neurologist was high (ICC 0.85). DISCUSSION: Both versions of the scale had good inter-rater reliability for the total score. Low agreement on movement disorder classification and identification of symptomatic body regions support our argument for a simplified scale. CONCLUSIONS: The S-FMDRS has high inter-rater reliability and good sensitivity to change. Further psychometric evaluation is warranted.
Entities:
Keywords:
functional movement disorder; psychogenic; reliability
Authors: M Hubschmid; S Aybek; G E Maccaferri; O Chocron; M M Gholamrezaee; A O Rossetti; F Vingerhoets; A Berney Journal: Gen Hosp Psychiatry Date: 2015-05-29 Impact factor: 3.238
Authors: Ruaidhri McCormack; John Moriarty; John D Mellers; Paul Shotbolt; Rosa Pastena; Nadine Landes; Laura Goldstein; Simon Fleminger; Anthony S David Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2013-10-11 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Glenn Nielsen; Jon Stone; Marta Buszewicz; Alan Carson; Laura H Goldstein; Kate Holt; Rachael Hunter; Jonathan Marsden; Louise Marston; Hayley Noble; Markus Reuber; Mark J Edwards Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2019-10-21 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: Susannah Pick; David G Anderson; Ali A Asadi-Pooya; Selma Aybek; Gaston Baslet; Bastiaan R Bloem; Abigail Bradley-Westguard; Richard J Brown; Alan J Carson; Trudie Chalder; Maria Damianova; Anthony S David; Mark J Edwards; Steven A Epstein; Alberto J Espay; Béatrice Garcin; Laura H Goldstein; Mark Hallett; Joseph Jankovic; Eileen M Joyce; Richard A Kanaan; Roxanne C Keynejad; Kasia Kozlowska; Kathrin LaFaver; W Curt LaFrance; Anthony E Lang; Alex Lehn; Sarah Lidstone; Carine W Maurer; Bridget Mildon; Francesca Morgante; Lorna Myers; Clare Nicholson; Glenn Nielsen; David L Perez; Stoyan Popkirov; Markus Reuber; Karen S Rommelfanger; Petra Schwingenshuh; Tereza Serranova; Paul Shotbolt; Glenn T Stebbins; Jon Stone; Marina Aj Tijssen; Michele Tinazzi; Timothy R Nicholson Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2020-02-28 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Maria Caterina Silveri; Sonia Di Tella; Maria Rita Lo Monaco; Martina Petracca; Alice Tondinelli; Gabriella Antonucci; Gino Pozzi; Giulia Di Lazzaro; Paolo Calabresi; Anna Rita Bentivoglio Journal: Acta Neurol Scand Date: 2022-02-02 Impact factor: 3.915
Authors: T Teodoro; A Koreki; A M Meppelink; S Little; G Nielsen; A Macerollo; J J Ferreira; I Pareés; A Lang; M J Edwards Journal: Eur J Neurol Date: 2020-04-14 Impact factor: 6.288