| Literature DB >> 32174886 |
Hernan Inojosa1, Dirk Schriefer1, Antonia Klöditz1, Katrin Trentzsch1, Tjalf Ziemssen1.
Abstract
Background: Balance problems can severely limit the quality of life for people with Multiple Sclerosis (pwMS) already in the early stages of the disease. PwMS are usually assessed with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), which includes a Romberg test for assessing balance. As the EDSS assessments are subjective to the examining neurologist, the postural stability of pwMS could be objectively quantified by implementing static posturography to detect balance problems and address preventive medical care.Entities:
Keywords: Romberg test; balance; expanded disability status scale; multiple sclerosis; sensitivity; static posturography
Year: 2020 PMID: 32174886 PMCID: PMC7057229 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.00135
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Balance parameters in healthy subjects and PwMS.
| Delineated area (cm2) | 1.67 | 0.98 | 5.48 | 7.65 | <0.001 |
| Average sway (mm) | 12.94 | 6.75 | 16.04 | 7.59 | 0.039 |
| Average speed (mm/s) | 16.22 | 3.97 | 24.40 | 14.66 | <0.001 |
Balance parameters in healthy subjects and MS patients according to EDSS Step Score.
| Delineated Area (cm2) | 1.67 | 0.98 | 3.46 | 4.07 | 4.00 | 2.86 | 9.79 | 12.09 | <0.001 |
| Average Sway (mm) | 12.94 | 6.75 | 14.11 | 7.20 | 15.64 | 6.06 | 19.11 | 8.72 | 0.025 |
| Average Speed (mm/s) | 16.22 | 3.97 | 21.39 | 10.65 | 20.96 | 7.83 | 32.12 | 21.06 | <0.001 |
significant difference with healthy group (p < 0.05) in post-hoc analysis.
significant difference with EDSS 0−1.5 group (p < 0.05) in post-hoc analysis.
significant difference with EDSS 2−2.5 group (p < 0.05) in post-hoc analysis.
significant difference with EDSS 2.5−3.0 group (p < 0.05) in post-hoc analysis.
Correlation coefficients between balance parameters and EDSS step scores, cerebellar function system and romberg test in MS patients (N = 99) according to spearman.
| Delineated area | |||
| Average sway | |||
| Average speed |
Figure 1Balance parameters in healthy subjects and in pwMS classified according to Cerebellar Function Score. a = significant difference to healthy group (p < 0.05). b = significant difference to Romberg Score 0 (p < 0.05). c = significant difference to Romberg Score 1 (p < 0.05). d = significant difference to Romberg Score 2+ (p < 0.05).
Figure 2Balance parameters in healthy subjects and pwMS classified according to Romberg Test. a = significant difference to healthy group (p < 0.05). b = significant difference to Cerebellar Score 0 (p < 0.05). c = significant difference to Cerebellar Score 1 (p < 0.05). d = significant difference to Cerebellar Score 2+ (p < 0.05).
Patients with cerebellar function system score 0 (N = 42) or Romberg test score 0 (N = 71) with impaired balance parameters according to different cut-points for deviation from the healthy group.
| Cerebellar function system score = 0 ( | Delineated area | 13 (30.95%) | 10 (23.81%) | 9 (21.43%) |
| Average sway | 6 (14.29%) | 2 (4.76%) | 1 (2.38%) | |
| Average speed | 10 (23.81%) | 8 (19.05%) | 8 (19.05%) | |
| Romberg test score = 0 ( | Delineated area | 39 (54.93%) | 30 (42.25%) | 28 (39.44%) |
| Average sway | 13 (18.31%) | 5 (7.04%) | 2 (2.82%) | |
| Average speed | 26 (36.62%) | 19 (26.76%) | 19 (26.76%) |