4.4 Article

Smart watch accelerometry for analysis and diagnosis of tremor

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE METHODS
卷 230, 期 -, 页码 1-4

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.04.021

关键词

Tremor; Parkinson's disease; Essential tremor; Accelerometry

资金

  1. Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR)
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) [MOP-82846]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Distinguishing the postural re-emergent tremor of Parkinson disease from essential tremor can be difficult clinically. Use of accelerometry to aid diagnosis is limited to laboratory settings. We sought to record and differentiate these tremors using a smart watch device in an outpatient clinic. New method: 41 patients were enrolled. Recordings were made with a smart watch device on the predominantly affected hand (all patients), and simultaneously with an analog accelerometer (10 patients) with hands at rest and outstretched. Tremor peak frequency, peak power, and power of the first four harmonics was calculated and compared between the two devices. Mean power at the first four harmonics was calculated and used to classify tremor as parkinsonian or essential. Test characteristics were calculated to compare the device and clinical diagnoses. Results: Mean harmonic peak power was both highly sensitive and specific for distinction of Parkinson disease postural tremor from essential tremor with an optimal threshold for our sample (sensitivity 90.9%, 95% CI 58.7-99.8%; specificity 100%, 95% CI 76.8-100%; Cohen's kappa = 0.91, SE = 0.08). Comparison with existing methods: The smart watch and analog devices had nearly perfect concordance of peak frequency and proportional harmonic power. The smart watch recordings in clinic took 3-6 min. Conclusions: A smart watch device can provide accurate and diagnostically relevant information about postural tremor. Its portability and ease of use could help translate such techniques into routine clinic use or to the community. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据