Alana J Muller1, Joanna M Z Mills1,2, Claire O'Callaghan1,3,4,5, Sharon L Naismith1,6, Paul D Clouston1, Simon J G Lewis1, James M Shine1,7. 1. Brain and Mind Centre University of Sydney Camperdown NSW Australia. 2. Sydney Medical School University of Sydney Camperdown NSW Australia. 3. Neuroscience Research Australia Sydney NSW Australia. 4. Behavioural and Clinical Neuroscience Institute University of Cambridge Cambridge United Kingdom. 5. Department of Psychology University of Cambridge Cambridge United Kingdom. 6. School of Psychology University of Sydney Camperdown NSW Australia. 7. School of Psychology Stanford University Stanford California USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinicians vary in their ability to elicit and interpret hallucinatory symptoms in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). There is limited evidence for informant-report measures of PD hallucinations as adjuncts to clinician-rated scales. OBJECTIVES: To determine the utility of an informant version of the validated Psychosis and Hallucinations Questionnaire (PsycH-Q) for assessing the presence and severity of hallucinations in PD; and, to evaluate accuracy of clinician judgements by comparison with informant report and self-report. METHODS: One hundred sixty-three PD patient-informant dyads completed self- and informant-report versions of PsycH-Q and three common questionnaire measures: Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire; Parkinson's Psychosis Questionnaire; and Scales for Outcomes in Parkinson's disease-Psychiatric Complications. We compared self-ratings and informant ratings across analogous subscales for the presence of hallucinations with clinician interview ratings on MDS-UPDRS as a diagnostic standard. RESULTS: There was a low level of agreement between dyads (average κ = 0.39; κ range = 0.32-0.47; P < 0.001), and patients indicated the highest prevalence of hallucinations compared to informant or clinician estimates. Clinician interview missed 32% of PsycH-Q hallucinators identified by dyads. Relative to the sample, 22 patients with exclusively clinician-appraised hallucinations had poorer overall quality of life measured by the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The sole use of clinician-rated scales may underestimate prevalence of PD hallucinations, and there is room for introducing self- and informant-report tools. Nonetheless, clinician appraisals are critical in cases when informant and patient insight might be affected by the impact of illness on quality of life.
BACKGROUND: Clinicians vary in their ability to elicit and interpret hallucinatory symptoms in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). There is limited evidence for informant-report measures of PD hallucinations as adjuncts to clinician-rated scales. OBJECTIVES: To determine the utility of an informant version of the validated Psychosis and Hallucinations Questionnaire (PsycH-Q) for assessing the presence and severity of hallucinations in PD; and, to evaluate accuracy of clinician judgements by comparison with informant report and self-report. METHODS: One hundred sixty-three PD patient-informant dyads completed self- and informant-report versions of PsycH-Q and three common questionnaire measures: Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire; Parkinson's Psychosis Questionnaire; and Scales for Outcomes in Parkinson's disease-Psychiatric Complications. We compared self-ratings and informant ratings across analogous subscales for the presence of hallucinations with clinician interview ratings on MDS-UPDRS as a diagnostic standard. RESULTS: There was a low level of agreement between dyads (average κ = 0.39; κ range = 0.32-0.47; P < 0.001), and patients indicated the highest prevalence of hallucinations compared to informant or clinician estimates. Clinician interview missed 32% of PsycH-Q hallucinators identified by dyads. Relative to the sample, 22 patients with exclusively clinician-appraised hallucinations had poorer overall quality of life measured by the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The sole use of clinician-rated scales may underestimate prevalence of PD hallucinations, and there is room for introducing self- and informant-report tools. Nonetheless, clinician appraisals are critical in cases when informant and patient insight might be affected by the impact of illness on quality of life.
Authors: D Brandstaedter; S Spieker; G Ulm; U Siebert; T E Eichhorn; J C Krieg; W H Oertel; K Eggert Journal: J Neurol Date: 2005-04-01 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: D I Kaufer; J L Cummings; P Ketchel; V Smith; A MacMillan; T Shelley; O L Lopez; S T DeKosky Journal: J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2000 Impact factor: 2.198
Authors: Martine Visser; Dagmar Verbaan; Stephanie M van Rooden; Anne M Stiggelbout; Johan Marinus; Jacobus J van Hilten Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2007-11-15 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Audrey McKinlay; Randolph C Grace; John C Dalrymple-Alford; Timothy J Anderson; John Fink; Derek Roger Journal: Aging Ment Health Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 3.658
Authors: Hubert H Fernandez; Dag Aarsland; Gilles Fénelon; Joseph H Friedman; Laura Marsh; Alexander I Tröster; Werner Poewe; Olivier Rascol; Cristina Sampaio; Glenn T Stebbins; Christopher G Goetz Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2008-03-15 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Christopher G Goetz; Barbara C Tilley; Stephanie R Shaftman; Glenn T Stebbins; Stanley Fahn; Pablo Martinez-Martin; Werner Poewe; Cristina Sampaio; Matthew B Stern; Richard Dodel; Bruno Dubois; Robert Holloway; Joseph Jankovic; Jaime Kulisevsky; Anthony E Lang; Andrew Lees; Sue Leurgans; Peter A LeWitt; David Nyenhuis; C Warren Olanow; Olivier Rascol; Anette Schrag; Jeanne A Teresi; Jacobus J van Hilten; Nancy LaPelle Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2008-11-15 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Sharif I Kronemer; Mitchell B Slapik; Jessica R Pietrowski; Michael J Margron; Owen P Morgan; Catherine C Bakker; Liana S Rosenthal; Chiadi U Onyike; Cherie L Marvel Journal: Cerebellum Date: 2020-09-30 Impact factor: 3.648
Authors: Kyla-Louise Horne; Michael R MacAskill; Daniel J Myall; Leslie Livingston; Sophie Grenfell; Maddie J Pascoe; Bob Young; Reza Shoorangiz; Tracy R Melzer; Toni L Pitcher; Tim J Anderson; John C Dalrymple-Alford Journal: Mov Disord Clin Pract Date: 2021-02-18
Authors: Johanna C Badcock; Frank Larøi; Karina Kamp; India Kelsall-Foreman; Romola S Bucks; Michael Weinborn; Marieke Begemann; John-Paul Taylor; Daniel Collerton; John T O'Brien; Mohamad El Haj; Dominic Ffytche; Iris E Sommer Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Federico Rodriguez-Porcel; Kathryn A Wyman-Chick; Carla Abdelnour Ruiz; Jon B Toledo; Daniel Ferreira; Prabitha Urwyler; Rimona S Weil; Joseph Kane; Andrea Pilotto; Arvid Rongve; Bradley Boeve; John-Paul Taylor; Ian McKeith; Dag Aarsland; Simon J G Lewis Journal: Transl Neurodegener Date: 2022-05-02 Impact factor: 9.883
Authors: Brenna Cholerton; Kathleen L Poston; Lu Tian; Joseph F Quinn; Kathryn A Chung; Amie L Hiller; Shu-Ching Hu; Krista Specketer; Thomas J Montine; Karen L Edwards; Cyrus P Zabetian Journal: Mov Disord Clin Pract Date: 2019-12-14
Authors: L M Chahine; R Feldman; A Althouse; B Torsney; L Alzyoud; S Mantri; B Edison; S Albert; M Daeschler; C Kopil; C Marras Journal: J Neurol Date: 2021-02-25 Impact factor: 4.849